Julea Ward

From the Alliance Defense Fund website:

ADF to appeal ruling that allows Eastern Michigan U. to expel Christian students for holding to beliefs
University banished graduate counseling student for not affirming homosexual behavior

DETROIT — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys will appeal a problematic federal court decision issued Monday in a lawsuit filed on behalf of student Julea Ward against Eastern Michigan University after it kicked out the Christian student for holding to her beliefs.  EMU dismissed Ward from its graduate counseling program in March 2009 for not affirming homosexual behavior as morally acceptable.  Ward would not agree to change her religious beliefs about homosexual behavior or express a message contrary to them during counseling sessions as a condition to receiving a degree.

“Christian students shouldn’t be expelled for holding to and abiding by their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Counsel David French, who argued before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan last month.  “To reach its decision, the court had to do something that’s never been done in federal court:  uphold an extremely broad and vague university speech code.”

EMU initiated its disciplinary process against Ward shortly after she enrolled in a counseling practicum course in January 2009, when she was assigned a potential client seeking assistance regarding a homosexual relationship.  Recognizing the potential conscience issue with the client, and knowing she could not affirm the client’s homosexual relationship without violating her religious beliefs, Ward asked her supervisor how to handle the matter.  Ward was advised to reassign the potential client to a different counselor.  EMU then informed Ward that she could only stay in the counseling program if she agreed to undergo a “remediation” program.  Its purpose was to help her “see the error of her ways” and change her “belief system” as it relates to counseling about homosexual relationships.

At a subsequent formal review meeting, EMU faculty denigrated Ward’s Christian views and asked several inappropriate and intrusive questions about her religious beliefs.  A faculty committee then dismissed her from the counseling program.  Ward appealed, but the dean of EMU College of Education upheld the dismissal.

“Julea merely followed her supervising professor’s advice by referring a potential client to a counselor who had no conscience issue with the particular matter to be discussed,” said French.  “She would have gladly counseled the client herself had the topic focused on any other matter. We trust the 6th Circuit will understand the constitutional issues involved in this case.”

The EMU speech codes enabling the university’s actions were challenged as part of the ADF lawsuit, Ward v. Wilbanks.  One policy prohibiting “discrimination based on…sexual orientation” adds that counselors cannot “condone” what the university defines as discrimination.  Another problematic policy states that EMU’s counseling department may discipline a student who shows a “failure to tolerate different points of view.”

Steven M. Jentzen, one of nearly 1,800 attorneys in the ADF alliance, is local counsel in the case. ADF is currently litigating a similar case involving a counseling student at Augusta State University in Georgia.

• ADF University Project website

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith.  Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

Linda Jernigan (www.RescuingHomosexuals.net) has found freedom from lesbianism through Jesus Christ.

Here is Part One of AFTAH’s June 19, 2010 interview with Linda Jernigan, a former lesbian who — beginning at the tender age of 12 — was lured into the homosexual lifestyle by an older woman who was supposed to be her “mentor.” Linda’s Chicago-based ministry, Rescuing Homosexuals, now helps people get out of the “gay” lifestyle, like she did through the grace of God. 

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file.  Left click on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment to load.) OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.

6-19-10, Linda Jernigan, All

Matt Barber's unapologetic approach toward the Culture War over homosexuality is the answer to wimpy evangelicals who seem to have forgotten that they are defending God's clearly-revealed Truth on this moral issue.

Here is Part Two of AFTAH’s June 12, 2010 interview with Matt Barber (CLICK HERE). (Listen to Part One HERE, or any other past interview HERE.) Barber is the Director of Cultural Affairs for the Liberty Counsel and an Associate Dean at Liberty University’s School of Law — where he will be teaching a course on “Sexual Behavior and the Law” this Fall. Barber and AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera discussed the upcoming Americans For Truth Academy and the hysterical opposition to it by homosexual radicals like Joe Jervis (who claims the Academy will “foster violence” against homosexuals). At the Truth Academy, to be held outside Chicago Aug 5-7, Barber will be lecturing on, among other things, a “Non-defensive approach to the issue of homosexuality.” Speaking of which, the two discuss the current malaise of evangelicals on the homosexuality issue — including Andy Marin’s preposterous call for a “moratorium” in churches on preaching against the sin of homosexuality.

Toward the end of the interview, Barber, author of the “The Right Hook: From the Ring to the Culture War,” discusses the homosexual activist movement (failed) attempt to open up blood donations to homosexual men — despite the well-documented linkage between male-on-male sex and various sexually transmitted diseases including HIV. You will want to pass this interview on to your friends!

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file.  Left click on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment to load.) OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.

6-12-10, Matt Barber, All

Linda Harvey, founder of Mission America (www.MissionAmerica.com).

We apologize for the delay in bringing you Part Two of our May 29, 2010 interview with Linda Harvey, founder of Mission America. (Go HERE for Part One.) But we are delighted to report that AFTAH will be reloading ALL of our interviews (available on the AFTAH Hour web page) — starting with this one — in a more user-friendly format. As you can see below, you can listen to the entire Linda Harvey interview on a single link. After we retool all the shows, you will no longer have to listen to four separate portions of the show (on four separate links) to hear the whole interview.

In Part Two of my interview with Linda, we discussed:

• the insidious promotion of homosexuality as an acceptable identity and lifestyle to young people — even preteens.
• the “gay” community centers that help expose young people to adult homosexual behaviors and promiscuity — one of the most troubling results of the proud, homosexualist movement;
• pro-homosexual youth literature (including a book by a Christian author) that advances the talking points of “gay” activism;
• the sellout theology of some politically correct “Emergent” church leaders.

Thanks to Linda for all she has done to bring truth to the culture. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

This is an mp3 file.  Left click on the link to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a few moments to load.) OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.

Linda Harvey, 5-29-10, All

Why should you spend your hard-earned consumer dollars on the products of a company like Progressive Insurance that promotes "pride" in immoral homosexual behavior? Progressive lists the various big-city "gay pride" parade dates on its special, pro-homosexual "Faces of Pride" website.

[The following message was sent out to AFTAH e-subscribers May 20, 2010:]

Folks, Jamil Adair of Horizon City, Texas, has given us permission to reprint his excellent letter to Progressive Insurance, which he sent after reading our article, “Progressive Insurance Co. Promotes Homosexuality.” (And Jamil approved the printing of his full address: here is one American who does not cower in fear of homosexual activist bullies.) Click HERE to read Jamil’s letter.

This is how we regain our culture: taking one principled stance at a time, and using our considerable power as consumers to defend morality and truth.  In the last decade or so, the corporate world was essentially ceded to the “gay” lobby without much of a fight — while pro-family advocates were busy opposing the homosexual activist political agenda in Washington, D.C.  Now look at the tragic result: major corporations are using their immense resources to promote sexual immorality and gender confusion throughout society.  And the agenda they are financing wars against Biblical values and directly threatens YOUR religious freedom.

One wonders: what have the Christian employees been doing all these years at companies like Progressive?   Why haven’t more people of faith spoken up in their place of employment — urging their superiors not to waste valuable corporate resources to fund and promote the homosexual and transsexual agenda?  And why aren’t more Christians and moral advocates demanding true corporate “diversity” — which includes respecting those employees who support real (man-woman) marriage and who oppose homosexual practice and gender confusion?

It’s time to stop whining and making excuses about the past and to start sending this very clear message to “gay”-pandering corporate execs: We’re not going to just sit back and take it while you use OUR consumer dollars to promote immorality to the public.  Jamil shows us the way with his letter to Progressive.

TAKE ACTION: Go HERE to read a short AFTAH piece about how the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign uses its rigged “Corporate Equality Index” to pressure corporations like Progressive Insurance into ever greater advocacy and financing of the homosexualist agenda.

Find other sellout corporations: you can also go directly to HRC’s website to view their complete corporate “Gay Index” and see for yourself which other major U.S. companies have sold out to HRC’s anti-Christian agenda.  Here’s the HRC link: http://issuu.com/hrcworkplace/docs/hrc_corporate_equality_index_2010.

Call Progressive (even if you don’t do business with them) at 1-800-PROGRESSIVE (800-776-4737); or fax your own letter to 800-229-1590.  (A Progressive phone/e-mail contact page is HERE.)   And work with AFTAH to contact other “100-percent-pro-homosexual” corporations and avoid spending your hard-earned $$$ on their products.

Thanks in advance for taking a stand for God’s truth in a culture that has bought into many lies of the Sexual Revolution.  God bless you. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

P.S.  Write us at americansfortruth@gmail.com or americansfortruth@comcast.net, and if you can, send a tax-deductible donation to support AFTAH’s work at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/.  And please pray for us.

Related AFTAH articles:

• “Human Rights Campaign’s Pro-Gay ‘Corporate Equality Index’ Rating System”
• “Texas Man Cancels Progressive Insurance Policy over Promotion of Homosexuality”
• “Ex-Gay Greg Quinlan of PFOX Challenges Pro-Gay PepsiCo Execs on Lack of Diversity”
• “Progressive Insurance Co. Promotes Homosexuality”

Laurie Higgins fought the teaching of the pornographic homosexual-authored play "Angels in America" as a high school writing instructor.

Our interview with Laurie Higgins, a writer with Illinois Family Institute, aired on May 8, 2010. Higgins is a relative newcomer to the pro-family scene but has distinguished herself with her brilliant and cogent analyses of  homosexual activism and with her “deconstruction” — to borrow a leftist term — of “queer” argumentation and concepts (e.g., “sexual orientation”).

Higgins is a former writing instructor at Deerfield High School in the northern Chicago suburb of Deerfield, Illinois. In Part One of this two-part interview, she describes how she was demoted at the school after speaking out about the promotion of homosexuality to students. She objected to the teaching of Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes, a pornographic and blasphemous play by homosexual activist playwright Tony Kushner, to senior English students, and it was all downhill from there.  In the end, after she had left Deerfield, Higgins learned that the district superintendent, George Fornero, a homosexual, had helped to spread malicious misinformation about Higgins and her family to other educators.

For a sample of Higgins’ writing, go HERE and HERE and HERE.

This is an mp3 file.  Left click on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download.

5-8-10, Laurie Higgins, All

“How can a Christian even in the service of mental or psychological consonance be open to a client assuming a same-sex identity when this therapist knows that consonance comes at the cost of his or her client’s eternal life?” — Laurie Higgins

Mark Yarhouse, Professor of Psychology, Regent University

Folks, it’s a heckuva long road from “abomination” (Leviticus 18:22) to “gay” (no Scriptural citation possible). Note the critical difference between acknowledging in a free society that people have the free will to make bad choices (i.e., embrace sin) — and respecting the sinful choices of such individuals as a “valued identity.” Laurie Higgins is right: Mark Yarhouse’s (and Warren Throckmorton’s) “Sexual Identity Therapy” puts Christian professionals in the dangerous position of doing the latter. Here is Yarhouse’s defense of SIT, “Understanding Sexual Identity Therapy.” And here is his and Throckmorton’s paper, “Sexual Identity Therapy: Practicing Guidelines for Managing Sexual Identity Conflicts.”

Also, we feel obligated to note that although we concur with Higgins regarding Yarhouse’s strained defense of SIT, we in no way put him in the same category as Throckmorton, the Grove City College professor and one-time pro-”change” advocate who has become a de facto pro-homosexual activist — talking down the possibility of lasting, ex-”gay” change for people caught up in homosexuality even as he disingenuously claims to adhere to biblical orthodoxy. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Higgins writes (article after jump):

_____________________________

Regent University Professor Mark Yarhouse’s Defense of Sexual Identity Therapy

By Laurie Higgins, reprinted with permission from Illinois Family Institute, April 20, 2010

Several weeks ago, I wrote about the Sexual Identity Therapy (SIT) Framework co-developed by Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton and Regent University professor Mark Yarhouse. This week, I’m going to take a stab at unpacking Dr. Yarhouse’s defense of the SIT Framework.

I will acknowledge the obvious from the get-go: I am not a trained mental health professional. I am an ordinary person trying to sift through what seems to me to be murky, abstract, intellectualized jargon that doesn’t quite conceal the anti-biblical ideas embedded in it.

I will also acknowledge that I’m critiquing these guidelines based on the assumptions that Drs. Throckmorton and Yarhouse hold orthodox theological views of homosexuality and that they believe that Christians are to submit their hearts, minds, and wills to Christ. I assume they believe that the Christian walk is not a hobby practiced in the evenings and on the weekends, and that we owe God both our leisure time and our professional lives. And further, I assume they believe it would be a sin of the gravest order to affirm in or to others that which God–whom they believe is an objective, transcendent, eternal reality–deems abominable.

Throckmorton and Yarhouse’s SIT Framework states the following:

The emergence of a gay identity for persons struggling with value conflicts is a possibility envisioned by the recommendations…some religious individuals will determine that their religious beliefs may become modified to allow integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity. We seek to provide therapy recommendations that respect these options …. Clinicians should assist clients to clarify their values in order to determine their preferred course of action. Therapists should be open to the possibility that a same-sex identity is the least dissonant course.

For a secular therapist this approach would be understandable, but how can a Christian even in the service of mental or psychological consonance be open to a client assuming a same-sex identity when this therapist knows that consonance comes at the cost of his or her client’s eternal life? Is temporal dissonance a more serious problem than eternal damnation? Is it compassionate to facilitate the appropriation of the “least dissonant course” when that course is one which God hates? And can a follower of Christ be complicit in any way of facilitating the pursuit of such a course?

It strikes me that the life of all Christians is a life of dissonance. Our temporal lives are necessarily characterized by a dissonance between our fallen, depraved natures and our new natures that are being sanctified through the power of the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 4:22-24 tells us that “You were taught with reference to your former way of life to lay aside the old man who is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful desires, to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and to put on the new man who has been created in God’s image–in righteousness and holiness that comes from truth.” Isn’t the term “dissonance” as used in the SIT Framework merely secularized jargon to describe the painful struggle all humans experience in trying to oppose our sin natures while living for Christ?

Believers, including those who are mental health professionals, owe our very lives to Christ, including our professional lives. We owe those who struggle with seemingly intractable, persistent sin–which is all of us–comfort, support, prayer, fellowship, and wise counsel that reflects truth, for it is only the truth of Christ that can set people free from bondage to sin. Those Christians who counsel men and women who suffer from unbidden same-sex attraction have no right or authority as Christians to “provide therapy recommendations” that “respect” the “option” of modifying religious beliefs in such a way to make possible “the integration of same-sex eroticism within a valued identity.”

The SIT Framework also states that “in sexual identity therapy, the focus is on sexual identity as a construct that incorporates the person’s assessment of sexual orientation, emotional preferences and inclinations to engage in sexual activities.”

SIT states that “We believe that the therapist should not attempt to persuade clients about how to value these dimensions but can assist clients to determine their own valuations.” How can a Christian, who is a Christian first, “assist” clients in determining that they “value” homosexual practice. If the professional standards dictate that therapists may not attempt to persuade clients how to “value” their same-sex attractions, then I would argue that Christian therapists ought to choose not to counsel clients who find little or nothing morally problematic with acting on same-sex impulses.

Let’s imagine that age of consent laws are someday overturned. And imagine a client experiences pedophiliac impulses. Or, imagine a client who experiences zoophilia, that is, a sexual attraction to animals. Could a serious follower of Christ be part of any process that results in a client determining that they value and will integrate pedophilia or zoophilia into their lives?

Clearly, those clients who enter therapy with some kind of dissonance between their same-sex attraction and their faith hold at least somewhat to orthodox Christian beliefs. Are temporal subjective feelings so superordinate that facilitating heresy in a client is justified? And to a Christian therapist, is the biblical position that homosexuality is anathema to God a “value,” or is it objective truth?

Dr. Yarhouse explains the different conceptions of mental health practitioners:

Some people will assume that Christians in the mental health field should function like they are a particular kind of pastoral care provider. Although there are many ways in which pastoral care providers practice, I see pastoral care providers as representing their faith tradition in a very intentional way. They hold up a standard and provide pastoral care to help people move toward that standard of orthodoxy (right belief) and orthopraxy (right practice)…. Others would view licensed mental health professionals as different than (sic) pastoral care providers in some important ways. They would see a licensed Christian psychologist, for example, as entering enter (sic) into a fiduciary relationship with the public, a relationship built upon trust, and part of that trust is built upon the assumption that the services provided are in keeping with the standards in the field as it is currently governed by the state in which the psychologist practices. So a group of one’s peers (psychologists, in this case, not Christian psychologists necessarily) would reflect on what is standard practice for addressing the topic of homosexuality in clinical practice.

Dr. Yarhouse employs some strained rhetoric in the phrase “Others would view” rather than saying “In contrast, Dr. Throckmorton and I provide services in keeping with the standards in the field as it is currently governed by the state.” Making such a direct first-person claim would reveal the troubling compartmentalization of their faith, the kind of schism about which Nancy Pearcey and Chuck Colson write:

[H]aving a Christian worldview…means following biblical principles in the personal and practical spheres of life….What does this mean in practice?… It means we do what is right even at great cost, because we are convinced that what we gain in the unseen realm is far greater than what we lose from a worldly perspective.

Sadly, many Christians….give cognitive assent to the great truths of Scripture, but they make their practical, day-to-day decisions based only on what they can see, hear, measure, calculate….They may sincerely want to do the Lord’s work, but they do it in the world’s way-using worldly methods.

Dr. Yarhouse’s rhetoric brings to mind the words of Martin Luther King Jr. in “Letter From Birmingham Jail” who was lamenting the failure of church leaders to boldly condemn the evil of racism:

In the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churchmen stand on the sideline and mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities…. And I have watched many churches commit themselves to a completely other worldly religion which makes a strange, un-Biblical distinction between body and soul, between the sacred and the secular. (emphasis added)

Christian counselors may be prohibited from “imposing” their values or even offering direction to their clients, but surely they enjoy the freedom to direct a client to another therapist rather than becoming complicit in facilitating the integration of same-sex eroticism into the “valued identity” of a client–or to put it another way, of facilitating heresy and behavior that if left unrepented of will lead to eternal separation from God.

I have heard people offer specious analogies to other professions, for example, suggesting that counseling someone who experiences same-sex attraction is analogous to a tax accountant accepting a client who is an adulterer. The analogy fails because tax return preparation is wholly separate from the moral issue of adultery, whereas when a therapist counsels someone on their experience of dissonance between their faith and their same-sex impulses, the moral issue is the entire purpose for their professional relationship.

I’m not arguing that Christian therapists must refuse to treat those struggling with conflicts between faith and sexual impulses. I am arguing that Christians are biblically prohibited from participating in any process that involves facilitating the modification of religious beliefs–that is to say, heresy–in such a way that same-sex eroticism can be integrated into a “valued identity.”

If what Drs. Yarhouse and Throckmorton mean when they say that “some religious individuals will determine that their religious beliefs may become modified to allow integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity,” is that therapists have to accept the unfortunate reality that by the end of therapy some clients will choose to pursue lifestyles that include the appropriation of wrong beliefs and destructive sin, their statement would be reasonable even coming from a Christian.

But their assertion that they “seek to provide therapy recommendations that respect the option of modifying religious beliefs to allow integration of same-sex eroticism” suggests a positive regard for an end result that no Christian should hold in positive regard. It suggests a willingness to facilitate the appropriation of wrong beliefs and destructive sin. Such a response is neither biblically defensible nor loving.

It could be cowardice, ignorance, pride, or vanity that causes a Christian counselor to affirm the ideas affirmed in the SIT Framework. But it could be the result of a serious lack of imagination. Imagine that you are a Christian counselor and with your assistance a client decides to modify his religious views in such a way as to accommodate sin that you know with absolute certainty will shortly result in unimaginable suffering–suffering worse than any torture you’ve ever read about in history books. Now imagine saying about this decision “I seek to provide therapy recommendations that respect this option.” Such a response should be inconceivable.

Charlene Cothran of TheEvidenceMinistry.org can never become "ex-Black," but she is thriving as a former lesbian. Cothran lived 29 years as a lesbian and "gay" leader before accepting Jesus Christ and leaving the lifestyle. If RNC Chairman Michael Steele were to take the time to meet people like Charlene, he might retract his unfortunate comparison of homosexuality to race.

TAKE ACTION: 1) Call or write Michael Steele at the RNC and urge him to meet with former homosexuals like Charlene Cothran (right), per PFOX’s press release below). Write chairman@gop.org or call 202-863-8500; and 2) Read this web alert by the radical homosexual group GLAAD targeting ex-”gay” Richard Cohen and use the contact information provided to urge CNN (404-827-1500) to continue featuring ex-gays and critics of homosexuality every time they feature a “gay” activist on their network. How can the ‘Gay’ Lobby talk about “diversity” when they are orchestrating campaigns designed to censor former homosexuals?

____________________________________________

Michael Steele, meet Charlene Cothran. As a former lesbian and one-time leading homosexual activist who now ministers to others seeking to leave that destructive and sinful lifestyle, Charlene might disabuse you of the notion that homosexuality is like race (see PFOX release below).

I recently had the opportunity to present at a Florida church alongside Charlene, who spoke at AFTAH’s 2007 banquet. She is now four years out of the homosexual lifestyle and has a powerful testimony of transformation through Jesus Christ. (Incidentally, Charlene is not a big fan of “Reparative Therapy” and relies on obedience to the Word of God as the primary instrument of change.)

Mr. Steele, you will never meet an “ex-African American” or a “former Latino,” but you can easily get to know some former self-identified “gays” — and you should, to put the issue of homosexual behavior in its proper perspective.

What the homosexual “Log Cabin Republicans” and “GOP Proud” activists want from you and from the Republican Party is to be treated as a legitimate “minority” — even though the purpose of their organizations is to build acceptance for immoral behavior and an illegitimate lifestyle choice. Strangely, if people practicing homosexuality comprise a “minority,” then it is one whose numbers shrink at the expense of another “minority”: ex-homosexuals. The same cannot be said of Blacks, Latinos, or any other real minority.

(And please do not equate deviant-sex-affiliation or homosexual practice with religion as some kind of behavior-based “minority” deserving rights; America was built on refugees from other, oppressive lands seeking religious freedom — so religious liberty is sacrosanct here. Moreover, from the beginning our Judeo-Christian-based legal system proscribed sodomy, so how can it be a “constitutional right”?)

RNC Chairman Michael Steele

P.S. Memo to GLAAD, Wayne Besen, Ex-Gay-Watch, Tim Kincaid, Warren Throckmorton (the “gay” bloggers’ favorite Christian professor, it seems), and the rest of the gang at “Focus on the Failures” — my term for those who regularly cast doubt on the ability of People Practicing Homosexuality to experience profound lifestyle change: you might want to examine Charlene Cothran’s website. She is over lesbianism, she’s not looking back and she is helping many others find freedom in Christ! (Ironically, Besen actually wrote an article attacking ex-gays for Cothran’s magazine, Venus, back when it was devoted to affirming homosexuality among African Americans.)  Check out her 2007 speech at AFTAH HERE and her website HERE. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

____________________________________

Our friends at PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) write:

RNC Pays for Lesbian Erotica While Refusing to Meet with Ex-Gays

Contact: Christopher Doyle, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) at PFOX@pfox.org

[Note from AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera: Please support PFOX with your tax-deductible donations; dollar for dollar, this is one of the most effective pro-family groups on the planet; sometimes it seems as they get more done with their tiny budget to challenge the GLBT juggernaut than gigantic pro-family organizations; go to http://pfox.org/donate.html and make your gift today!]

Washington D.C. — “Michael Steele, chair of the Republican National Committee, has consistently refused to meet with members of the ex-gay community,” said Greg Quinlan of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX).  “Now we know why. The RNC would rather use donor funds for its staff to watch lesbian erotica at nightclubs than help support individuals who wish to leave homosexuality.”

In last year’s interview with Gentleman’s Quarterly magazine, Steele compared being homosexual to being Black, and was quoted as doubting that ex-gays exist.  PFOX offered to meet with Steele on numerous occasions to show him that ex-gays do exist and explain the process of individual change.  To date, Steele has refused to meet with members of the ex-gay community, including African-American former homosexuals.  In the past, ex-gays have met with Ed Gillespie, one of Steele’s predecessors.

“It’s no wonder the RNC continues to lose factions of its members, such as Tea Party conservatives,” said Christopher Doyle, a former homosexual and PFOX board member.  “Michael Steele would be better off if he extended ex-gays a place at the table rather than paying his staff to watch lesbians dance on it at strip clubs.”

###

Remember to read the PFOX blog regularly for ex-gay views and news. See http://pfox-exgays.blogspot.com/

Michael Glatze

Former homosexual and onetime “gay youth” activist Michael Glatze will be the guest on the Americans For Truth Hour at our new time tonight, Saturday, April 3rd at 11:00 PM to midnight Central Time on WYLL (AM-1160 in Chicagoland). The show will stream beginning at 11:00 PM at www.wyll.com. Part Two of the Glatze interview will air Saturday, April 10.

The weekly “Americans For Truth Hour” features an in-depth interview with a front-line activist in the  “culture wars.”  WYLL is a 50,000 watt station that covers Chicagoland and reaches into lower Wisconsin and northwest Indiana. Glatze’s bold exodus from the homosexual lifestyle and the “GLBT” (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgnder) movement was widely heralded in pro-family and conservative circles. Homosexual activists predictably became critics, as did fellow travelers like Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton — who once proclaimed that homosexuals could change their “orientation” but now curiously finds himself opposing men like Glatze — especially those with testimonies like his of radical transformation. (Yes, Warren, ex-gays DO EXIST…. Read the new LifesiteNews story on the Grove City professor HERE.)

Glatze has embraced a Biblical worldview and approaches the homosexual issue from that Christian perspective. See his thoughts on change (and Throckmorton) HERE. You can read Glatze’s blog HERE. Previous Programs Available

Previously, the “Americans For Truth Hour” aired early Saturday mornings on WYLL; past two-part interviews with Dawn Stephanowicz (author of “Out from Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting” [available from AFTAH for $20 postpaid]); Pete Lines (also an ex-”gay” and the author of “The Leader of the Band”); and Brian Camenker of MassResistance will be made available on podcasts. Or you can order copies on CD for $20 postpaid for each interview — or all three interviews (six separate tapings) for $50 postpaid. Send your check or money order to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. Or you can order online — specify which interview(s) you want on the order form — at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/. Each of these interviews is fascinating and brings reality and truth to the debate of whether homosexuality should be celebrated in our culture. Please listen this Saturday and tell your friends! Thank you! — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Warren Throckmorton

Prof. Warren Throckmorton said in an interview with AFA’s One News Now published today that he supports homosexual “civil unions” and equivocated on the question of whether homosexuality is “normal, natural and healthy.” (In 2007, Throckmorton answered affirmatively to the same question when asked by radical homosexual activist Mike Signorile.) Is this what Throckmorton’s employer, Grove City College, means when it advertises itself as “authentically Christian”?

Note Throckmorton’s parsing of words in the ONN interview (below). Looking through the lens of Judeo-Christian history, to NOT discourage someone from adopting a ‘gay’ identity and practicing  homosexuality (even in a “monogamous” same-sex relationship), is effectively to promote the acceptance of homosexuality — i.e., sexual sin.

Moreover, Prof. Throckmorton seems to adhere to the notion that his Christian life and his professional “therapist” role are mutually exclusive — as if secular requirements in the current psychological paradigm supersede adherence to God’s holy and inspired Word. As AFTAH previously reported, Throckmorton’s and Regent University professor Mark Yarhouse’s “Sexual Identity Therapy” (SIT) stipulates that therapists must respect their client’s chosen “sexual identity” — whether that means rejecting a homosexual identity out of religious convictions or embracing one that “allow[s] integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity.” (p. 7)

The overriding question remains: can a faithful, Bible-believing Christian who believes it is sinful to condone immoral sexual behavior practice the SIT approach professionally — if that means NOT attempting to dissuade clients who decide they are happiest living homosexually from embracing that identity?

Perhaps the choice between faith and therapy is not as stark for Throckmorton because — despite his claim to ONN to uphold a “traditional view of homosexuality and sexual ethics” — the GCC professor affirms monogamous “gay” relationships. In 2006, the Los Angeles Times reported that Throckmorton is “uneasy that NARTH [National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality] rejects even the possibility of a fulfilling life with a same-sex partner.” Writing on his blog the day the story was reported, Throckmorton did not take issue with the L.A. Times article but in fact linked to it, noting that it had also been picked up by other news sources.

Normal,  Natural and Healthy?

I will gladly take a shot at answering the three-part question that Throckmorton answered so assuredly in his radio interview with Signorlie, but with which — in the ONN interview — he struggles, ultimately trying to split it down the middle:

“Is homosexuality natural, normal and healthy?”

• Natural? Nope. Anal sodomy and various other homosexual sex acts are unproductive perversions obviously at odds with human anatomy and God’s created design. Since two people of the same sex cannot produce a child, it is not natural (nor possible) for a child to have “two dads” or “two moms.”
• Normal? Not a chance. (Well, maybe in San Francisco, where men are allowed to walk the streets completely naked; where an “order” of male “drag queens” called “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” — with twisted names like Sister Roz Erection — are regarded as a legitimate charity; and where every Easter Sunday a city park hosts a shameful spectacle called the Hunky Jesus Contest that blasphemes the Son of God on the Christian holy day.)
• Healthy? Again, no: check out the latest CDC stats on the disproportionate disease rates for “men who have sex with men.”

It appears that in an effort to preserve his reputation, Prof. Throckmorton not only has raised more concerns about his dubious claim to to biblical fealty, but further undermined Grove City’s slogan — aimed at parents of future potential GCC students — that the evangelical college is “authentically Christian.” AFTAH will be publishing other pro-family advocates’ reactions to the ONN interview with Throckmorton.  – Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, www.aftah.org

One News Now reports:

___________________________________________________

Christian professor clarifies stance on ’sexual identity’

Jim Brown – OneNewsNow – 3/11/2010

A professor at an evangelical Christian college in Pennsylvania says his guidelines for “sexual identity therapy” are being misunderstood by some Christian proponents of traditional marriage.

Dr. Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College says he has not lost faith in God’s ability to change people who are struggling with homosexuality, but believes most of those people are not likely to experience a “diminishment” in same-sex attraction.

Dr. Warren Throckmorton”To say that because it appears from the research that change is infrequent in attractions doesn’t mean I’ve lost my faith in God’s ability to change people,” he states.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality expressed concern on American Family Radio Monday that Throckmorton “downplays” the stories of former homosexuals “who have experienced profound change.” (See earlier story)

Throckmorton tells OneNewsNow that his “Practice Guidelines for Sexual Identity Therapy” are for professional therapists and not pastors. He denies that as a therapist he would advise clients to maintain a homosexual identity.

“The framework [for the guidelines] doesn’t encourage a client to do what the counselor thinks he or she ought to do,” says the professor. “The framework follows the beliefs and the values of the client. So to say that the counselor encourages clients any particular direction would be in error.”

Throckmorton says he personally holds a “traditional view of homosexuality and sexual ethics.” However, when asked whether he believes homosexuality is “normal, natural and healthy,” he said he could not answer that with a simple “yes” or “no” response. He said “in a professional therapy situation” it is accurate to say that “homosexuals can live normal, natural, and healthy lives that are free of mental illness.”

On the issue of same-sex “marriage,” Throckmorton says he takes a more “nuanced” view — and that he opposes same-sex marriage but believes the Equal Protection Clause permits homosexual civil unions.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Grove City College (President Richard Jewell: 724-458-2500; rgjewell@gcc.edu) and ask them if GCC professor Warren Throckmorton’s unorthodox views on homosexuality represent “authentically Christian” teachings on this issue. (GCC advertises itself as a solid, “authentically Christian” institution.) Request a written response as to whether Throckmorton’s writings on and approach toward homosexuality honor Grove City’s Christian charter “rejecting relativism and secularism.” Please share the response you receive with us at americansfortruth@comcast.net.

______________________________

By Linda Harvey, www.missionamerica.com

A broad coalition of pro-family groups recommends that parents keep their children home on the deceptive, pro-homosexual “Day of Silence,” to be observed this year on April 16, 2010, but one “gay”-affirming counselor started what he calls the “Golden Rule Pledge” instead.

Yet, the “Golden Rule Pledge” actually functions as a disinformation tool and a divisive wedge in schools and among Christians. It is insidiously misleading and would bring harm to kids. It grieves me to take this position, but there’s no choice, because lives are at stake.

Dr. Warren Throckmorton (pictured above), a self-labeled “christian” counselor at Grove City College [contact GCC HERE], has indicated on a radio show he does not object to homosexuality when a person feels comfort with the lifestyle. My concern is that he may be communicating this to youth and college students whom he counsels, because his “Golden Rule” project takes a stand tolerant of this destructive and sinful behavior by encouraging student “respect.”

He has expressed his preference for students remaining in school on the “Day of Silence” and hearing pro-homosexual propaganda, and learning to sympathize with those practicing these behaviors, rather than taking an unequivocal, biblical stand against these harmful practices by remaining home. Throckmorton doesn’t even like the Exodus-sponsored “Day of Truth,” which encourages kids to remain in school and have a frank conversation, in love, with friends while presenting the biblical view of homosexuality. Throckmorton calls this “offensive.”

Throckmorton’s support of the “Day of Silence” will do incalculable harm to many young people. Misleading professionals like Throckmorton in positions of influence can make our sons and daughters become comfortable with entering into, staying in, or approving of homosexuality, bisexuality and gender change.

If I were a parent who discovered my minor child had been counseled in this way, I’d bring the largest and most aggressive medical malpractice suit I could launch against this counselor at Grove City.

Golden Rule? Not on your life.

Jesus would never make a person feel more comfortable about:

• Young males having sex with males, the incidence of which rose over 12 % per year between 2001 and 2006 among males ages 13 to 24 1;
• Young “lesbians” choosing a fatherless life for any future children, since they can never conceive children with female partners;
• Hoping in such relationships for a false “marriage” in violation of Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9, where Christ told us that “from the beginning” people were created male and female, and that one man and one woman form a marriage;
• Teens and even younger children believing they should change genders. As with homosexuality, we should be doing everything possible to counsel these kids and prevent these behaviors among youth.

Throckmorton on his site (http://goldenrulepledge.com/about/) uses the language of homosexual activism. He couldn’t be more helpful to their cause if he were a consultant with GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, which sponsors the national “Day of Silence” Examples of the GRP’s sympathetic, even pro-homosexual statements:

1. The Day of Silence is to “bring awareness to bullying and harassment of transgender, gay, lesbian, and bisexually identified students.” This is odd both in the use of activist terms and that “transgender” comes first. This “gay”-crafted rhetoric gives a nod to the unsupportable “born-that-way” claim and a significant level of sympathy for those involved in what the eternally-existent Christ called an “abomination.” By any Christian standard, is this GOLDEN RULE material? NOPE.

2. Another phrase is quite revealing:

“Many straight Christian and conservative students are conflicted about this day. They do not affirm homosexual behavior but they also loathe disrespect, harassment or violence toward any one, including their GLBT peers.”

The logical fallacies here abound. If students truly don’t “affirm” homosexuality, then don’t cooperate with its promotion through the deceptive “Day of Silence.”

The second sentence is classic pro-”gay” propaganda. These are not the only choices! To stay home is to show “violence” or approval thereof? This is so unfair to tradition-minded families and students, who feel they make a very positive statement by staying home! The Gospel and its sexual standards are, after all still good news. And one does not have to approve of homosexuality to prevent bullying, violence, or uncivil behavior.

3. Here’s the actual “pledge” language:

This is what I’m doing:

I pledge to treat others the way I want to be treated.

Will you join me in this pledge?

“Do to others as you would have them do to you.” (Luke 6:31).

Hmmm. “…The way I want to be treated.” So, if a student is about to enter, or has entered, a high-risk practice that is called an abomination by our Lord, and has shared this with classmates, a “true” Christian should attend school to support a day that affirms this behavior and scorns any warnings to that student? Some friendship!

Here’s a biblically-based alternative: “Friends don’t let friends do homosexuality!”

Then, the Pledge website talks about affirming the “safety” of all, based on Christ’s teachings. This piggybacks on the language of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) and others who have used a supposed “safety” strategy to obtain affirmation of homosexuality in the schools. Homosexuality is safe and Christian teachings about it being an abomination are unsafe, is the real message. Bullying? Harassment? No one wants those things, but that’s not GLSEN’s actual concern, because schools are fully empowered now to punish incidents where such misbehavior occurs.

No, the “Day of Silence” is about propaganda. The goal is to shame and label Christians and tradition-minded students and teachers, silence their authentic witness, and even silence any public health warnings. Real safety would be to scream from the rooftops about the harm homosexuality or gender change will bring to these young lives. And since no one is born homosexual, these desires are demonstrably changeable, so no one is left without a positive alternative. Christ’s authentic path always gives hope.

This is such a travesty that if we were all ancient Israelites, we’d be rending our clothing and putting on sackcloth and ashes! What is happening to kids is corruption by uncaring and misguided adults.

Throckmorton is doing a great job of affirming propaganda meant to harm young lives and keep them away from Christ through misunderstanding. I don’t know if he means to do that, but that is going to be — guaranteed — the result.

This is completely upside down. Throckmorton doesn’t get it, or doesn’t want to get it, or loves the approval of “gay” and “transgendered” blogs and activists, or he has an as-yet-undisclosed motive. [Editor's note: Americans For Truth has asked Throckmorton for his views on "same-sex marriage," "civil unions," homosexual "special rights" ("sexual orientation") laws, etc., but he has not answered our queries.]

This is not Christian and is a heretical use of the Golden Rule.

Please join me in praying for Warren Throckmorton, for his repentance, and also for his duplicitous dealings to be revealed so no further harm is done to our precious and impressionable kids.

And please help me pray that the emotionally manipulative “Day of Silence” is revealed for what it is — adults exploiting precious kids.

Notes:

1. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5725a2.htm. See Table at end.

Linda Harvey, founder of Mission:America

________________________________

Linda Harvey is founder and president of Mission: America, based in Columbus, Ohio. Perhaps more than any other American, she has sounded the alarm about the danger of promoting/affirming “GLBT” (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender) identities to young people [click the "To Christians" button HERE]. Please support Mission: America’s important work [Donate link is at the bottom of the main website page]. To order a 2-DVD set of Linda Harvey’s talk last year at Americans For Truth, send $35 postpaid to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567, or specify “Linda Harvey 2-DVD set” with your gift of $35 or more through AFTAH’s online donor page.

“Every piece of evidence that can be culled from the text’s literary and historical context confirms that the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice, like its prohibition of adult incestuous unions, is absolute, rejecting all forms of homosexual practice regardless of consent and commitment.” –  Robert Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary 

“St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts.  It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex.  So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so.” – Homosexual Episcopal Bishop V. (Vicky) Gene Robinson, interview with CNSNews.com

TAKE ACTION AND LEARN: Educate yourself about the Bible’s clear teaching against homosexual conduct and relationships. Begin by reading the article below, taken from Prof. Robert Gagnon’s paper, “What the Evidence Really Says about Scripture and Homosexual Practice: Five Issues, and sharing it with your Christian friends, especially those bending to pro-”gay” advocacy. And please support Prof. Gagnon by ordering his excellent 2008 DVD series, “Love, the Bible and Homosexual Practice” (cost is $42 including shipping & handling). As Christians, it is our duty to respond intelligently to false ”gay” theology, which is gaining a foothold in the Church and in the culture. And for those who are not Christian, you need to understand the bogus history that activists like (Vicky) Gene Robinson are using to advance their pro-homosexuality agenda.

_______________________________________

Dear Readers,

Please watch this short video interview of homosexual activist and Episcopal Bishop V. (Vicky) Gene Robinson’s latest attempt  to discredit the biblical (Romans 1) prohibition against homosexual practice (courtesy Eyeblast TV and CNSNews.com):

You can read a transcript of Bishop Robinson’s CNS interview HERE. It is extraordinary to behold a major denominational “Christian” leader dedicate a sizable part of his professional life to undermining the clear witness of the Bible and tradition against a particular sexual sin  — which just so happens to be the one with which he identifies. Unfortunately for Robinson, his rehashed “gay” theology does not square with history, as Prof. Robert Gagnon — the world’s leading orthodox authority on the Bible and homosexuality — reveals below.

Note Robinson’s assumption that homosexuals are ”born.” Despite the existence of a small cottage industry of pro-homosexual researchers — e.g., geneticist-turned-”gay”-activist Dean Hamer — seeking to prove inborn homosexuality, they have not succeeded in doing so. (Hamer’s media-hyped 1993 male “genetic homosexuality” study in the journal Science could not be replicated in the same journal.)

Also note that despite Robinson’s claim about innate homosexuals, the peculiar and obviously dysfunctional circumstances of his own life — starting at his birth — support a “nurture” rather than “nature” model for the causation of homosexuality. Robinson’s parents, expecting him to die, gave him two female names — Vicky Imogene — because they had hoped for a daughter. Then when he survived, they allowed him to live as a boy carrying those feminine names — a parental act that was irresponsible at best and cruel at worst. (Remember the Johnny Cash song, “A Boy Named Sue”?)

Thus, the abnormal factors that undoubtedly contributed to Bishop Robinson’s deviant proclivities and homosexual self-identification as an adult undermine his current, self-serving, specious claim that modern, “monogamous” homosexuality is some kind of benign, naturally “oriented” variation on life that was not yet discovered by the Apostle Paul. [See related AFTAH article: "Researcher: Half of Gay Couples Choose to be ‘Non-Monogamous.’"]

Prof. Rob Gagnon

Moreover, if we know that thousands of men and women have left homosexuality through faith in Jesus Christ and through various methods and circumstances — why would we treat this particular sin as somehow special and unchangeable — or not sinful at all, as long as it is “domesticated”?

Professor Rob Gagnon and other scholars — including some homosexuals — who have studied the context of the New Testament Book of Romans take issue with Bishop Robinson’s claim about monogamous homosexuality not being proscribed. TAKE ACTION AND LEARN:  Please share this article with your friends and support Prof. Gagnon (www.robgagnon.net) — a rare, indefatigable foe of pro-homosexual political correctness in the academy — by ordering his 2008 DVD series, “Love, the Bible and Homosexual Practice” (cost is $42 including shipping & handling). The excerpt below is taken from Gagnon’s 2009 paper, “What the Evidence Really Says about Scripture and Homosexual Practice: Five Issues.”

– Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.” (I Corinthians 16: 13-14)

_________________________________________

Prof. Gagnon Responds to “Gay” Theological Arguments on the Book of Romans:

3. Romans 1:24-27 and the Erroneous “Exploitation Argument”

Claim: The Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice in Romans 1:24‐27 applies only to exploitative and hedonistic forms of homosexual practice such as sex with slaves, prostitutes, and adolescents.

What the evidence really shows: Every piece of evidence that can be culled from the text’s literary and historical context confirms that the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice, like its prohibition of adult incestuous unions, is absolute, rejecting all forms of homosexual practice regardless of consent and commitment.

Five lines of evidence make this point clear. First, Paul in Rom 1:24-27 rejects homosexual practice because it is a violation of the God’s creation of “male and female” as a sexual pair in Genesis. In Rom 1:23-27 Paul intentionally echoed Gen 1:26-27, making eight points of correspondence, in the same tripartite structure, between the two sets of texts (humans/image/likeness, birds/cattle/reptiles, male/female). Paul was rejecting homosexual practice in the first instance because it was a violation of the male-female prerequisite for sexual relations ordained by the Creator at creation, not because of how well or badly it was done in his cultural milieu.

Second, the kind of nature argument that Paul employs in Rom 1:18-27 isn’t conducive to a distinction between exploitative and nonexploitative forms of homosexual practice. For Paul contended that female-female and male-male intercourse was “contrary to nature” because it violated obvious clues given in the material structures of creation that male and female, not two males or two females, are each other’s sexual “counterpart” or “complement” (to use the language of Gen 2:18, 20) in terms of anatomy, physiology, and psychology. What Paul says regarding the vertical vice of idolatry (1:19-23) is equally true of the horizontal vice of same-sex intercourse: male-female complementarity is “clearly seen, being mentally apprehended by means of the things made” (1:19-20). Some have argued that the ancients had no comprehension of a complementarity argument. Yet as classicist Thomas K. Hubbard notes in his magisterial sourcebook of texts pertaining to Homosexuality in Greece and Rome (University of California Press, 2003): “Basic to the heterosexual position [among Greek and Roman moralists in the first few centuries A.D.] is the characteristic Stoic appeal to the providence of Nature, which has matched and fitted the sexes to each other” (p. 444). Hubbard is supportive of homosexual relationships, yet admits the point.

Third, the fact that Paul in Rom 1:27 specifically indicts male homosexual relations that involve mutual, reciprocal affections—“males, having left behind the natural use of the female, were inflamed with their yearning for one another”— precludes any supposition that Paul is thinking
only of coercive relationships.

Fourth, Paul’s indictment of lesbianism in Romans 1:26 further confirms that his indictment of homosexual practice is absolute, since female homosexuality in antiquity was not primarily known, or criticized, for the exploitative practices of sex with slaves, prostitutes, or children. And there can be little doubt that Paul was indicting female homosexuality, as evidenced by:

1. the parallelism of the language of 1:26 (“females exchanged the natural use”) and 1:27 (“likewise also the males leaving behind the natural use of the female”);
2. the fact that in antiquity lesbian intercourse was the form of female intercourse most commonly labeled “contrary to nature” and paired with male homosexual practice;
3. the fact of nearly universal male opposition to lesbianism in antiquity, even by men engaged in homosexual practice; and
4. the fact that lesbian intercourse was the dominant interpretation of Romans 1:26 in the patristic period.

Fifth, contrary to false claims that people in the Greco-Roman world had no concept of committed homosexual unions, there is plenty of evidence for the conception and existence of loving homosexual relationships, including semi-official “marriages” between men and between women. Moreover, we know of some Greco-Roman moralists who acknowledged the existence of loving homosexual relationships while rejecting even these as unnatural (indeed, we can trace this idea back to Plato’s Laws). This is also true of the Church Fathers. For example, Clement of Alexandria (late second century) referred to “women … contrary to nature … marrying women” (Paidagogos 3.3.21.3). Obviously marriage implies commitment (else there is no need to marry) yet commitment does not change the unnatural and sinful character of the relationship. And it should go without saying that Jewish writers in Paul’s day and beyond rejected all forms of homosexual activity. For example, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus stated the obvious to his Roman readers: “The law [of Moses] recognizes only sexual intercourse that is according to nature, that which is with a woman…. But it abhors the intercourse of males with males” (Against Apion 2.199).

It is hardly surprising, then, that even Louis Crompton, a homosexual scholar, acknowledges this point in his massive work, Homosexuality and Civilization (Harvard University Press, 2003; 500 pgs.):

“However well-intentioned,” the interpretation that Paul’s words were not directed at “bona fide” homosexuals in committed relationships….seems strained and unhistorical. Nowhere does Paul or any other Jewish writer of this period imply the least acceptance of same-sex relations under any circumstance. The idea that homosexuals might be redeemed by mutual devotion would have been wholly foreign to Paul or any other Jew or early Christian. (p. 114)

Also worth noting is the falsity of claims that the ancient world knew nothing akin to our understanding of a homosexual orientation or of congenital influences on at least some homosexual development. As classicist Thomas K. Hubbard (cited above) notes:

Homosexuality in this era [i.e., of the early Imperial Age of Rome] may have ceased to be merely another practice of personal pleasure and began to be viewed as an essential and central category of personal identity, exclusive of and antithetical to heterosexual orientation. (p. 386)

Bernadette Brooten, a lesbian New Testament scholar who has written the most important book on lesbianism in antiquity also acknowledges this point. She states that “Paul could have believed” that some persons attracted to members of the same sex “were born that way and yet still condemn them [better: their behaviors] as unnatural and shameful…. I see Paul as condemning all forms of homoeroticism as the unnatural acts of people who had turned away from God” (Love Between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism [University of Chicago, 1996], 244).

WATCH THE LIVE WEBCAST: Friday 2-6:35 p.m. and Saturday 9 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. and 1:30 -5:00 p.m. See the Liberty Counsel press release on the conference HERE.

Liberty University School of Law will host a one-day conference followed by a one-day symposium addressing homosexuality and its consequences. The Friday, February 12, conference is entitled “Understanding Same-sex Attractions and Their Consequences.” On Saturday, February 13, the Liberty University Law Review will host a legal symposium entitled “Homosexual Rights and First Amendment Freedoms: Can They Truly Coexist?”

Those struggling with same-sex attractions need understanding and hope for a life without conflict, so it is imperative to understand the implications of same-sex attraction and the broader homosexual agenda.

If you cannot attend the conference and symposium on Friday afternoon and Saturday, you can watch the live webcast HERE.

See the schedule for Friday and Saturday for the extraordinary list of speakers.

Event times and locations are as follows:

Friday, Feb. 12, 10:00 a.m., convocation, Liberty University – Vines Center;
Friday, Feb. 12, 2:00 – 6:45 p.m., conference, Liberty University School of Law – Supreme Courtroom;
Saturday, Feb. 13, 9:00 a.m. – 5 p.m., symposium, Liberty University School of Law Supreme Courtroom;
Saturday, Feb. 13, 5:00 p.m. banquet, Liberty University – Grand Lobby of DeMoss Hall.

The conference and the symposium are free, but tickets are required for the Saturday evening banquet. For more information, please go to www.LC.org, contact Liberty University School of Law at 434-592-5300 or visit http://law.liberty.edu.

Reprinted from LifeSiteNews.com [click here to sign up for LifeSite's daily news e-mails]

Lisa Miller, a former lesbian who accepted Christ and left the lifestyle, with her daughter Isabella. Miller does not want her Isabella raised in an environment in which sexual immorality is modeled as normal.

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

NEW YORK, February 2, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Janet Jenkins, a practicing lesbian who was once in a “civil union” with ex-lesbian Lisa Miller, is conducting a media campaign to locate Miller’s seven-year-old daughter in an attempt to gain custody of the child.

Miller’s daughter, Isabella, was conceived via artificial insemination during the pair’s relationship, and has no biological relationship with Jenkins. Miller disappeared with Isabella in December, apparently in an effort to prevent a Vermont judge from transferring custody of her child to Jenkins.

But Jenkins is doing numerous interviews with mainstream media outlets, ostensibly in an effort to locate Isabella (described by Jenkins in one interview as “my child”), which are uncritically repeating her charges against Miller, while failing to mention Miller’s charges against Jenkins – -including that her relationship with Jenkins was abusive.

“I think she’s dangerous, and I think she’s very vulnerable and I think she’s capable of anything,” Jenkins told ABC News on January 29 when asked about Miller.

“I think she’s very desperate,” added Jenkins. “I think the people and the places that she is exposing herself to and my child to – our child to – it’s just frightening for me to even think about.”

Reports of Jenkins’ abusive behavior

However, Jenkins herself has been repeatedly accused of being “dangerous” — both to Miller’s child, Isabella, and to Lisa Miller herself.

In a lengthy interview with LifeSiteNews.com in 2008, Miller recounted the physical and emotional abuse she said she suffered at Jenkins’ hands, and also stated that her daughter was desperate not to return to Jenkins’ custody.

In addition to being “physically and emotionally abusive,” and repeatedly trying to throw her out of the house, Jenkins even “said she wanted to kill me,” Miller told LSN in her account of her relationship with Jenkins, which began in late 1998 and lasted more than four years.

Miller said she fled the ongoing abuse twice before leaving Jenkins permanently in 2003.

According to Miller, Isabella had become desperate not to return to Jenkins (shown at left) after a visit in which she said that she had been required to bathe naked with her other “mother.” She had even spoken of wanting to die.

“Last year, Isabella put a comb up to her neck and said she wanted to kill herself after one of the visits,” Miller told LSN. “She took a comb and pressed it into her neck and said, ‘I want to kill myself.’ I don’t know where she got that. It was immediately after a visit. Other people have seen huge changes. She also started openly masturbating which is not something that my child has done.”

“She is 6 now (2008) but this started when she was 5 — after visits,” Miller continued. “The very first time that Janet ever saw Isabella after the two and a half years, her very first over-night visit — the court ordered it and I allowed it because it was in Virginia and she was supposed to have been supervised by her parents — Isabella came home and said, ‘Mommy, will you please tell Janet that I don’t have to take a bath anymore at her house.’

“I asked her what happened. She said, ‘Janet took a bath with me.’ I asked her if she had a bathing suit on. ‘No, Mommy.’ She had no clothes on and it totally scared Isabella. She had never seen this woman except once in 2 ½ years and she takes a bath with her.”

Other Witnesses

According to Miller attorney Rena Lindevaldsen, Miller was not alone in her accusations. In a 2008 interview with LSN, Lindevaldsen said that a psychologist who had examined Isabella before and after her trips to see Jenkins had submitted two affidavits testifying to the damaging effects of the trips.

At least two other witnesses also submitted affidavits testifying to Isabella’s troubling behavior following visits with Jenkins, according to Lindevaldsen.

Even Jenkins’ own parents, who are supportive of their daughter, admit that Jenkins had a “spat” with Miller while they were together, in which Jenkins threatened to force her onto the street, something they objected to.

“Janet said: ‘I’m going to kick her A-double-S out. I’m going to put her clothes on the curb.’ My answer was: ‘You can’t do this. The kid has no place to go,” Jenkins’ father told the Washington Post Magazine. “‘You’ve already said you’d allow her to move in. You can’t put her out on the street. You don’t do stuff like that.’ ”

When LSN spoke to Lindevaldsen in late 2008, she said that the Vermont courts had delayed ruling on the accusations for nine months, but that a hearing had finally been scheduled. Ultimately the testimony of Miller, at least one psychologist, and multiple other witnesses was not enough to prevent Judge Richard Cohen from transferring custody to Jenkins in late 2009.

The mainstream media also has almost completely ignored the accusations, with the exception of a single 2008 Newsweek article that mentioned them in passing, along with Jenkins’ rebuttal. The affidavits presented to the court were never mentioned.

However, ABC News and other major newspapers and media outlets have allowed Jenkins to repeat, without proof and without rebuttal, her accusations that Miller is “dangerous” and “capable of anything.” One writer at ABC, David Schoetz, went so far as to compare Miller’s disappearance to that of Clark Rockefeller, who tried to flee with his ex-wife’s biological daughter. Schoetz wrote that if “we can learn anything from the Clark Rockefeller, pictured in his mugshot above, it’s that hiding a child is not an easy thing to do, especially when so many people care.”

_________________________________________

Related links:

Helping Isabella Facebook Page

AFTAH articles:

• Virginia Christian Mom, Lisa Miller, Could Lose Custody of Daughter to Former Partner, Vermont Lesbian Activist;
• CWA, Barber Urge Prayer for Ex-Lesbian Lisa Miller and Daughter Isabella;
• Liberty Counsel Update on the Hearing in Lisa Miller’s Case;
• ‘You’re Not My Mommy!’ — Matt Barber on Lisa Miller Custody Battle;
• Barber: Virginia Supreme Court Buys Time on Lisa Miller Case

Previous LifeSiteNews coverage:

• Judge Gives Miller 30 Days to Transfer Daughter to Former Lesbian Lover or Face Arrest;
• Ex-Lesbian Lisa Miller “Disappears” as Date Passes for Court-Ordered Transfer of Daughter to Former Lover;
• Exclusive Interview with Lisa Miller, Ex-Lesbian Fighting for Custody of Own Child against “Civil Union” Partner;
• Lisa Miller Ordered to Hand Custody of Daughter to Former Lesbian Lover

Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton -- who is on record affirming homosexuality as "natural, normal and healthy" despite the College's biblical faith charter -- has joined homosexual activists in crusading against Uganda's proposed Anti-Homosexuality law. Perhaps Throckmorton, who has lost his faith in the ability of Jesus Christ to help "homosexuals" leave the lifestyle, could learn something from the more biblically faithful Ugandans.

TAKE ACTION: contact Grove City College HERE and GCC President Richard G. Jewell (rgjewell@gcc.edu; 724-458-2500) and request a written explanation as to why they employ an activist professor who undermines the Bible’s clear teachings on homosexuality as a changeable sin (and not a natural “orientation”).

___________________________

Folks, I’ve been trying to avoid the Ugandan “Culture War” on homosexuality because I figure we’re busy enough with our own here in the USA. But that hasn’t stopped American homosexual activists and fellow travelers like Professor Warren Throckmorton of the “evangelical” Grove City College from insinuating themselves into the Ugandan situation. (Sadly, Warren has lost his faith in the ability of God to radically change homosexuals through Christ, and now busily works — even in Uganda! — to promote the faithless and disheartening message that most “gays and lesbians” cannot change their basic “orientation”; see his Uganda Independent column in which he makes that assertion HERE.)

Here’s the question I keep asking myself about the Uganda controversy: just what is it that qualifies the United States of America to lecture the Ugandans about homosexuality? Is it our public policy that enshrines immoral sexual behavior (oops: “sexual orientation”) and gender confusion (er…”gender identity and expression”) as a “civil right”? Is it our homosexual “marriage” laws that make a mockery of this divine institution (laws about which Prof. Throckmorton is curiously silent)? How about our pro-homosexuality educational propaganda in K-12 schools that corrupts young students’ minds in the name of “tolerance”? Or the 24/7 “gay bathhouses” and sex clubs that proliferate in urban centers across the United States to facilitate quick-and-easy (and anonymous) deviant sexual hook-ups? (“Come to America: where you can have all the safe sodomy you want! Discounts for students (no joke) and free condoms available for your perverted pleasure!”)

Tell me: does Uganda have something to learn from Christian “defectors” like the opportunistic Prof. Throckmorton — who is now a de facto promoter of homosexuality as normal, natural and healthy while ostensibly still claiming some sort of “Christian” mission at GCC? (Grove City College boasts in evangelical circles that it is “authentically Christian” — an advertising claim of diminishing accuracy the longer it abides likes of Throckmorton.)

[TAKE ACTION: contact Grove City College HERE and GCC President Richard G. Jewell (rgjewell@gcc.edu; 724-458-2500) and request a written explanation as to why they employ an activist professor who undermines the Bible's clear teachings on homosexuality as a changeable sin (and not a natural "orientation").]

Challenge to Accommodationists: I stand corrected if Prof. Throckmorton or any Grove City prof — indeed, any homosexual activist or pro-”gay” apologist — can show me anything resembling “sexual orientation” in the Bible as this concept is currently understood and posited in academia, the media and society.

Nope. What we’re seeing here is sheer Western activist arrogance. (Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media calls it “Homosexual Imperialism.”) I haven’t yet studied the proposed Ugandan legislation but I agree with Bob Knight’s analysis below — and AFTAH is clearly on record opposing draconian penalties for homosexuality like those imposed by jihadist Islamic radicals. But I do know this: Uganda would do well to avoid the example set by America of a cultural-elite-driven society that celebrates homosexuality (along with other sexual immoralities) — and then reaps the whirlwind that results, including the following:

• devastating (public) health crises that are prolonged by the politically correct protection of the very sexual misbehaviors that helped spread the disease in the first place;
• the proliferation of “gay” activist groups that war against Judeo-Christian values and cruelly smear people of faith who dare to defend those values;
• pro-homosexuality, politically correct indoctrination — even on the job — masquerading as “diversity” — i.e., the gradual replacement of Christian proselytization with the institutional advocacy of sin, disguised as tolerance;
• public immorality and annual “gay pride” parades that subject children to immoral displays including public nudity;
• the undermining of historic Judeo-Christian teachings on sex and marriage; “queer” theological attacks on the Bible and sacred texts due to their unambiguous teachings against homosexual acts;
• the rise of “gay”-sympathetic, anti-religious bigotry and even laws that criminalize the outworking of a biblically-informed conscience against homosexuality; legal and cultural harassment of moral-minded organizations like the Boy Scouts and Salvation Army that refuse to treat homosexuality as a civil right;
• the corruption and victimization of children — including ever younger “coming out” ages for children declaring their supposed “gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender” (“queer”) identity.
• turning the public schools into indoctrination zones for the “GLBT” ideology — all in the name of tolerance and “protecting kids”; the spread of “gay” school clubs, first to high schools, then to middle schools, and ultimately to grade schools.

As you can see, most of America’s “lessons” on homosexuality for Uganda are negative ones. Could it be that the more faith-filled and Bible-trusting African Christians have something to teach jaded Americans like Barack Obama and Warren Throckmorton about homosexuality?  – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org ; send us your thoughts at americansfortruth@comcast.net

__________________________________

The following is a column by Bob Knight in World Net Daily:

____________________________________________

All the bile that’s fit to print

Exclusive: Robert Knight hits N.Y. Times for ‘knee-jerk spasms’ targeting Christians

Posted on WND January 13, 2010

You cannot find a better example of selective outrage and character assassination than the Jan. 5 New York Times editorial, “Hate begets hate.”

This humdinger of a self-descriptive screed has it all: wild, unsubstantiated charges; villains; hysterical calls for action; and a smug, holier-than-thou tone that would put “Saturday Night Live”’s Church Lady to shame.

At issue is Uganda’s proposed law criminalizing homosexuality. But the editorial’s real focus is crucifying Christians who had given talks in Uganda and any part of Christendom that has not bowed its knee to the gay gods.

The Times notes that “three evangelical Christians, whose teachings about ‘curing’ gays and lesbians have been widely discredited in the United States, helped feed this hatred.” The editorial names Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundidge and Don Schmierer, who “gave a series of talks” last March that “claimed that gays and lesbians are a threat to Bible-based family values.”

I don’t know Mr. Brundidge, but I do know Mr. Lively and Mr. Schmierer. Both are honest and courageous men who, out of Christian compassion, dare to tell the truth about homosexuality. For this, the Times brands them as hatemongers.

While Mr. Lively has written perceptively and passionately about countering the homosexual activists’ political and cultural agenda, there is no evidence of “hate.” Trying to steer someone away from destructive, immoral, changeable behavior is an act of love, not hate. And it is beyond absurd to label as a bigot a man like Don Schmierer, who supports AIDS ministries and reaches out to sexually conflicted people with the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ. Casting the gentle, soft spoken Mr. Schmierer as a “hater” is like calling Mother Teresa a foul-mouthed harpy.

These men discuss sexual behavior and its consequences for individuals, families and societies, and the blessings of God-given hope. As is typical for a fully owned subsidiary of the homosexual activist movement, the Times falsely claims that the Christian leaders oppose the people themselves. The Times has bought into and promoted the media-fed fiction that people are born gay, cannot change and therefore their volitional sexual behavior is synonymous with identity. In gay parlance, it’s “who they are,” not what they do.

This is nonsense. If we are defined by our sexual behavior, then men addicted to pornography are nothing more than “pornophiles.” It is homosexual activists who have insisted on making sexual desire the be-all and end-all of personal identity. They did this to hijack the moral capital of the black civil-rights movement, equating “sexual orientation” with immutable characteristics like skin color or ethnicity. One big problem remains for them, though. Skin color and ethnicity are morally neutral. Sexual behavior is fraught with moral, social and physical consequences and has been regulated by every society since time began.

The Times ignores the Christian men’s pointed criticisms of the proposed Uganda law and says, “We don’t have much hope that they will atone for their acts.”

Well, we don’t have a whole lot of hope that the Times will atone for its many portrayals of Christians as hate-filled bigots whenever the “gay” issue surfaces. They are following the playbook of “After the Ball,” a gay strategy manual from 1989 that instructs activists to “jam” opponents into silence through threats of guilt by association, outright smears and phony “scientific” claims that go unexamined. The strategy has worked brilliantly, as even conservative voices have been frightened into silence or into steadily ceding moral ground, circling the wagons only around the word “marriage.”

The Times is not alone, of course, in its relentless pursuit of homosexual orthodoxy. On Jan. 7, the Washington Post ran an editorial about Uganda entitled, “A barbaric proposal.” The Post editors, at least, did not engage in Christian bashing, and stuck to very real problems with the proposed law. They did repeat a gay mantra, however: “Being gay is not a choice.”

Science has by no means settled the issue. None of the highly publicized studies by gay researchers in the 1990s has been replicated, and several have been discredited. Then, too, there is the inconvenient existence of many people who engage in homosexuality for years and later embrace the straight life. The “ex-gay” movement is large and growing, but the media are keeping it one of the best-kept secrets out of deference to militant gay activists in the newsrooms.

Uganda has been in the cultural elites’ hot water before by bucking the U.S.-backed condom crusade in Africa and slashing its AIDS rate with campaigns for abstinence and fidelity. The current homosexuality bill is seriously flawed. It contains such overreaches as jail terms for people who do not report homosexual activity and life imprisonment for people who engage in the behavior. But the Times and the Post go beyond criticizing the harsher aspects of the law and attack the underlying concern of Ugandans to defend marriage and family, avoid the corruption of their children and put the brakes on AIDS and other diseases.

The Times and the Post warn that Uganda will become a “pariah” nation “shunned globally” if the law is passed. That may be so. But it might behoove the press to take a closer look at some other countries in Africa whose governments, in the grip of Muslim extremism, routinely cut off people’s heads merely for changing religions. Some nations, such as Egypt, have governments that look the other way as young Christian girls are abducted, raped and forced into Muslim marriages. Do these nations qualify as “pariahs”?

The Times’ editors need to come to terms with their knee-jerk spasms against evangelical Christians and others who defend family values. They routinely depict pro-marriage Americans as motivated solely by hatred and prejudice, never by genuine, heartfelt concerns.

In their editorial’s own words: “You can’t preach hate and not accept responsibility for the way that hate is manifested.”

If this is so, the next equipment the Times should order for its newsroom is … a mirror.

____________________________

Robert Knight is senior writer and correspondent for Coral Ridge Ministries and the author of “Fighting for America’s Soul” (Coral Ridge 2009) and the upcoming book “Radical Rulers.”

Pastor Stephen Boissoin

By Tim Bloedow; reprinted from ECP Centre website, Dec. 4, 2009

The ECP Centre (Equipping Christians for the Public-square Centre) is very encouraged to see that sanity prevailed in Alberta’s court system with the decision Thursday to overturn the abusive Human Rights Commission ruling against Stephen Boissoin. We are also grateful to have played an important part in the case, raising awareness of the case over the past several years and organizing three successful fundraising dinners in the spring of this year which helped to bring in over $25,000 from generous Canadians towards Mr. Boissoin’s substantial legal costs. We continue to receive donations designated to Mr. Boissoin’s legal defense and we are grateful for the Christians who take their faith seriously enough to be aware of these disturbing cases and who are able to donate to support fellow-Christians in today’s battles.

Those familiar with the case will know that seven years ago, a “human rights” complaint was filed against Stephen Boissoin due to his sharp criticism of homosexuality in a letter to the editor printed in the Red Deer Advocate. In December 2007, the Alberta Human Rights Commission issued a ruthless decision against Mr. Boissoin which itself was an expression of hatred against Christianity. The provincial HRC essentially became a tool for a homosexualist inquisition whereby Mr. Boissoin was ordered to give a false apology for the substance of his letter. He was banned from ever criticizing homosexuality again in public or private communications, and even from the pulpit. The implications of the decision were stunning in terms of the imposition of the state over the church and the restrictions on religious liberty. Mr. Boissoin was also fined $5,000.

Needless to say, Mr. Boissoin filed an appeal of the decision. His legal counsel Gerry Chipeur was very confident that they would win the appeal because the historic principles of fundamental justice were on Mr. Boissoin’s side so, in a real court where such rules applied, the absurd HRC decision wasn’t expected to stand. The plaintiff Darren Lund, however, is reported in the Calgary Herald as not having made up his mind whether to appeal the decision.

Stephen Boissoin vindicated

In his decision, Justice Earl Wilson said that whatever one thinks about Mr. Boissoin’s comments, they didn’t violate Alberta’s human rights legislation which is to say, as the Edmonton Sun reported, that “there was nothing in the letter to suggest it was exhorting Albertans to discriminate against homosexuals in areas of employment, tenancy or goods and services which fall under provincial jurisdiction.” Justice Wilson said, “”Inferring some sort of call for discriminatory practices prohibited by provincial law is an unreasonable interpretation of the letter’s message.”

Of course, that wasn’t really the issue. Mr. Lund, who does not acknowledge being homosexual himself, but who thinks he has enough sensitivity to represent homosexuals, wanted Mr. Boissoin’s comments to be judged a hate crime and outside of free speech protections. Justice Wilson’s decision also rejected this spin on Mr. Boissoin’s comments.

But the references to discrimination aren’t unimportant. As Colby Cosh noted in an analysis posted on Macleans.ca today, “a province, Wilson observed, isn’t allowed to duplicate the Criminal Code provisions against hate speech. It’s only allowed to suppress hateful speech that can also be shown to encourage discrimination in the specific areas that lie within provincial powers and are enumerated in the statute – i.e., housing, employment, access to goods and services.”

Following the announcement of the decision, Stephen Boissoin expressed great joy over this victory for “freedom of speech and religious expression in Canada,” adding: “I am overjoyed that this malicious and frivolous process is over. It’s been seven and a half years of my life being run through the mud. I’ve been called a bigot and a hate-monger. What a waste of time.”

The Canadian Constitution Foundation, Canada’s freedom fighting legal defense organization, was also pleased that Justice Wilson threw out the Commission’s decision, but they remain concerned that the anti-freedom provision which was exploited in the complaint against Mr. Boissoin remains on the books. “Unfortunately, the law that was used against Reverend Boissoin to subject him to a expensive and stressful legal proceedings for more than seven years is still on the books,” said executive director John Carpay. That law forbids anyone from publishing a statement that is likely to expose a person or a class of persons to hatred or contempt on the basis of several criteria including “sexual orientation.” “In spite of today’s court ruling, Albertans need to continue to exercise extreme caution when speaking about public policy issues, lest they offend someone who then files a human rights complaint,” said Mr. Carpay. “No citizen is safe from being subjected to a taxpayer-funded prosecution for having spoken or written something that a fellow citizen finds offensive.”

Canada’s hard-left media not interested

A stunning development from Thursday’s decision is the lack of development, which is to say, the total lack of interest in the ruling by Canada’s media. Alright, I admit it, I’m not stunned at all by this totally predictable result from Canada’s anti-Christian, pro-homosexual media.

Canada’s national media fawns over homosexuals, so any victories they receive in law, politics or the culture are widely reported. In a sharp shift from their traditional role, Canada’s news media almost universally despise the “little guy,” who today is often the Christian, especially when homosexualists are the aggressors.

Certainly when Alberta Christian Stephen Boissoin got strung up by the provincial HRC, acting on behalf of pro-homosexual Darren Lund, Canada’s passionately pro-homosexual media was on top of this story, providing lots of sympathetic coverage to the homosexualist agenda and the HRC.

But, today (Friday), following the announcement of the decision throwing out the anti-democratic HRC ruling, how much media coverage did the story receive across Canada? Who wants to guess?? Based on the results of two media search engines we used, we discovered that the Canadian Press dutifully wrote up the decision. And four Alberta papers reported on it: the Calgary Herald, the Lethbridge Herald, the Calgary Sun and the Edmonton Sun, but we could not find one single newspaper outside of Alberta which covered the story. Perhaps they were so amazed with the profundity of the decision that they wanted at least 24 hours to analyze it, so maybe on Saturday we’ll see the 35 or more cross-Canada media hits on the story that we would have seen today if the decision went against Mr. Boissoin. Even late this evening, a Google News search for “stephen boissoin” only produces 8 hits: One is Canoe which is the Sun Media article printed by the Edmonton and Calgary Sun papers, one is Xtra [a homosexual publication], another is the social conservative LifeSiteNews, one is CTV, another is Macleans.ca, another the Vancouver Sun and the last two are both from the Montreal Gazette.

Even if our media searches missed one or two articles, the point is still vivid in terms of how the media reflects a strong pro-homosexual advocacy agenda, working hard to self-censor any stories that undermine the march towards a homosexualist hegemony. They would deny it, but the evidence is before us for all to see. If it’s an unconscious bias, then that means that this anti-Christian bias is even more ingrained than many of us thought.

Ezra Levant has done a great deal of valuable work publicizing all the diverse people who have spoken out in defense of freedom and against the HRC agenda in the past few years. This includes many media outlets, journalists and editorial boards from across Canada. It’s great to emphasize and publicize these comments in the hope that it will pressure these media personnel to be consistent with their subsequent comments on liberty, but you don’t want to take these defenses of liberty too seriously or place too much hope in them. Most Canadian journalists are die-hard leftists and most of the rest are left-leaning, and leftists will only defend freedom on a case-by-case basis if they see it as in their own best interests to do so. And secularists never seem to see it as in their best interests to defend liberty when the case involves a Christian defendant and a homosexualist complainant.

Despite the fact that Canada’s liberty tradition is rooted in the Judeo-Christian worldview, Christians have very few friends in today’s Canada, especially in positions of influence. Most people, including all special interest groups, are fighting for power and control, not for liberty. If Mr. Lund appeals this recent decision, we may have to rally the troops again on behalf of Mr. Boissoin and the fundamental constitutional principles of liberty which are at stake with this case.

Justice Wilson slams the Alberta government

By implication, Justice Wilson’s decision is a damning indictment of Alberta’s anti-liberty Conservative government. Many patriotic Canadians were shocked when the Stelmach government chose to intervene in the Boissoin HRC case – AGAINST Stephen Boissoin. Even the national homosexual activist group EGALE (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere) spoke out against this case, arguing that Darren Lund’s complaint went over the top with its censorship agenda. Despite the number of responsible people and organizations which condemned this complaint, the Stelmach Conservative government, with no obligation to do so, chose to intervene against freedom of speech, against religious liberty, against freedom of conscience, against Christianity.

Justice Wilson was more direct in his repudiation of phony experts. Mr. Cosh reported in his Macleans article: “Wilson thus ended up throwing several witnesses who testified against Boissoin overboard: the ex-cop who thought Boissoin’s anti-gay babblings might make teens ‘act out’, for example, and the shrink who warned that the Reverend’s letter might provoke a second Columbine. … Wilson has thus made expert evidence in future tribunal proceedings a lot harder to come by: the logic of his decision suggests that complainants will no longer be able to round up every bleeding-heart social scientist or self-styled hate expert they can find, but will have to provide evidence of potential economic impacts from hate speech.”

Even the homosexual publication Xtra in an online article about the decision today declared: “Gays also stand to benefit from yesterday’s court decision. As we continue to face censorship — whether it be at the Canadian border or on major TV networks — it’s in our interest to promote free speech and expression. Censoring homophobes is an easy way to shut them up, but it does little to address the outrageousness of their arguments. Speech should be fought with speech.”

Justice Wilson’s decision to throw out the HRC decision against Mr. Boissoin by extension is also a decision against the Alberta government and its shockingly imprudent decision to intervene on the wrong side of that case. If the Stelmach government is not intelligent enough to realize this, the Wildrose Alliance is likely to benefit from such Conservative arrogance.

——-

We would be most grateful for any donations you would consider giving to the work of the ECP Centre in defending Christians facing persecution in Canada and as we confront hostile forces in our culture through NoApologies. Please send your donation to: ECP Centre, PO Box 7, Russell, ON K4R 1C7 or visit our website to make a donation online. Thank you very much for your support.

- 30 -

You can reach NoApologies/ECP Centre at ecpcentre@gmail.com or at 613-496-0091.

___________________________

Parker writes:

‘The Blind Side’ should trouble as well as inspire

Oher’s story is about private individuals, about personal choices and responsibility, and about Christians

The Blind Side” is a beautiful new film based on a magnificent and heartwarming true story.

But I hope that the many who see it do not simply walk out all aglow. It should also produce concern.

This story about hopelessness transformed into achievement should be a typically American story. We should be concerned that, increasingly, this is not the case. That this is the exception that should be the rule.

Michael Oher’s story has already received much attention. How a homeless black 15-year-old winds up in a Christian private school and how a white Christian couple adopted him and helped him develop to get the grades to stay in school, become a star athlete, an All-American football player and a multimillion-dollar NFL draft pick.

Our wake-up call should be that the factors that saved and transformed Michael Oher’s life stand in stark contrast to the government solutions we hear from Washington about dealing with our problems relating to poverty and education.

Oher’s story is about private individuals, about personal choices and responsibility, and about Christians.

And it’s not just about white Christians. The decision that started the chain of events that changed Oher’s life came from a black Christian woman.

Oher, fatherless, with a drug-addicted mother, bounced from one foster home to another, and then moved from one private home to another, sleeping on friends’ floors in a Memphis, Tenn., ghetto. While Oher was sleeping on the floor at “Big Tony” Henderson’s place, Henderson’s mother died. Her dying wish was to get her grandson, Steven, out of the public school where he was enrolled and into a “Christian school.”

The film opens with Tony making his pitch at the Briarcrest Christian School (called Wingate in the film) in Memphis to enroll his son. And, to also admit his son’s friend “Big Mike.”

Steven’s acceptance wasn’t problematic, because he had good grades. But Oher, with a 0.6 GPA, demanded all the Christian grace the admission team could muster. It came through.

Michael Lewis’ book, on which the film is based, discusses Oher’s public-school experience before Briarcrest, which the film skips over.

He’d been in 11 different schools. The public schools were pushing him through to get rid of him, not to educate him.

His records showed that in ninth grade he missed 50 days of school, yet he was passed.

The film also ignores the IQ issue, which in the book is an eye opener.

Shortly after his enrollment at Briarcrest, Oher, struggling to make it, met Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy, a self-made couple of means. They took him in and soon adopted him.

By his senior year, making a final push to get his grade-point average to meet NCAA standards for college admission, they took him to psychologists for intelligence testing.

They found, incredibly, that in his few years at Briarcrest, his IQ increased almost 30 points. When he was admitted, his IQ measured 80. Now tests showed him as between 100 and 110. This, according to Lewis, “wasn’t supposed to happen. IQ was meant to be a given, like the size of one’s feet.” The psychologists were dumfounded.

Michael Oher achieved this. But he couldn’t have done it without a Christian school and his caring Christian adopted parents who loved him and respected his uniqueness.

President Barack Obama’s $4.5 billion in new education spending will not fix our education crisis. Government and moral relativism never has been the answer and will not be.

School choice and traditional values are the answers. It’s freedom, not bureaucrats, that produces miracles. Michael Oher may be an exceptional individual, but his story need not be an exceptional story.

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education.

Former homosexual Pete Lines shares about his life at AFTAH's banquet last month.

“[I]f my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land….“

“But if you turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them, then I will uproot Israel from my land, which I have given them, and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. I will make it a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples. And though this temple is now so imposing, all who pass by will be appalled and say, ‘Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?’ People will answer, ‘Because they have forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers, who brought them out of Egypt, and have embraced other gods, worshiping and serving them—that is why he brought all this disaster on them.’ “ — 2 Chronicles 7

Dear Readers,

I want to wish each of you a Happy Thanksgiving and thank you for your support of Americans For Truth this year, and for standing up for God’s Truth in an era (and in a country) in which true biblical values have fallen out of fashion.  America is the most spectacular nation every formed –  with blessings from God too great to quantify.  But like the Israelites, we will be judged if we continue to reject the will of our Creator.

This has been a good year so far for Americans For Truth, despite the challenges brought by the severe economic downturn.  We opened a new office in Carol Stream, where we have hosted several fine pro-family speakers (please note that our scheduled Laurie Higgins dinner-lecture has been postponed until January).  Our banquet a month ago was a great success, and our website continues to draw readers who are frustrated by the media’s incessant cheerleading for homosexuality and gender confusion (the “transgender” “T” in the “GLBT” movement).

AFTAH is founded on a simple idea: that homosexual behavior is as wrong, changeable, unnatural and unhealthy today as it was thousands of years ago.  We confront the “Gay” Activist Lobby directly, and expose its destructive agenda without apology — as we did in Maine just before that state’s citizens voted to reject “same-sex marriage.”  In a culture in which even many conservatives seem reluctant to publicly oppose homosexuality as a matter of principle, Americans For Truth stands out as bold and uncompromising.  In our vocabulary, political correctness is a dirty word because it’s all about fearing man instead of God.

For our adherence to God’s truth we are hated by “queer” activists.  But we do not hate them back: one of my goals for 2010 is to pray more for lost people caught up in homosexuality — who desperately need the grace, forgiveness and love of God.

As I look out at the moral landscape of our country on sexual issues and marriage, I am haunted by the spectacle of a post-Christian America squandering its immense spiritual heritage, as we fall from a biblical standard into amoral relativism.   A country in which even the “Christian” kids have lost the ability to tell right from wrong.  The other day, Christianity Today article reported on one group’s study that found that “younger evangelicals … are more tolerant of same-sex marriage” than older evangelicals.

More “tolerant” of government-sanctioned “marriage” based on perversion that the Bible calls an abomination (Lev. 18:22)? Has the term “evangelical” — with its presumed allegiance to Scripture as the source of Truth — lost its meaning?  How is it that young Christians (and older ones) are ditching the Bible’s truth in favor of a sin-enabling worldliness, and what can be done about it?  I wish I had all the answers, but I do know that abandoning God’s heart on homosexuality is not one of them.

If our nation’s moral trajectory is not reversed, we will sink further into ungodliness and inevitable judgment, all the while patting ourselves on the back for our “tolerance” and new ideas about sin.  And yet, Christians know the way back: a humble return to following Almighty God through the daily study of His Inerrant Word, the Bible — which reveals His Son, Jesus Christ, who alone is the Way, Truth and the Life.

(Yes, whoever you are, whatever you’ve done, you can trust your life to Christ.  He will forgive you and take the punishment for your sins.  Salvation is a free gift from God — you can’t earn your way to heaven — “so that no one can boast.” And God’s grace is limitless: did you know that David Berkowitz, the infamous “Son of Sam” New York City serial killer, is now a powerful Christian witness to the life-changing power of the Gospel?!  Watch Berkowitz’s amazing YouTube Testimony HERE.)

We must teach a new generation that they have no right to redefine God’s timeless moral code just because, well … they’re young and hip.  (I write this as a hipness-challenged 47 year old.)  Young followers of Christ must understand that they cannot truly love homosexuals without telling them the full truth — that “gay identity” and “same-sex relationships” are not part of God’s plan for anyone.  “Feelings” can lead people astray (our hearts are deceitful), but there is freedom through Christ, as ex-”gay” Pete Lines told our banquet audience last month.

On this Thanksgiving Day 2009, let us give thanks to God for the blessing that is America, and repent for our creeping toleration of all kinds of sin. And let us pledge to return to biblical fidelity — each in our own sphere — as a path toward national healing.  God bless you.

P.S.  I found this online CWA interview with David Barton on America as a “Christian nation” extremely informative.  Share it with your friends and family!

Sincerely in Christ,

Peter LaBarbera
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
E-mail: americansfortruth@comcast.net

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:

Reprinted from the Christian Civic League of Maine website:

Nov 6, 2009

The normal routine of the League was interrupted Friday afternoon, when an anonymous caller called to say he owned guns and his next target was the former director of the League, Mike Heath (right). The death threat was apparently related to the recent win on Question 1, which revoked the right of homosexuals to be married in Maine.

The caller said the following:

“I am calling about Mr. Mike Heath, the Executive of your Christian Civic League of Maine.  He thinks that gay people should have our rights revoked that we already have. Well I can tell him this – I’m a gay guy who owns guns, and he’s my next target.”

The call was the latest and most serious example of intimidation by homosexual rights supporters after the win on same sex marriage. The League withheld publishing comments from homosexual rights supporters since the referendum vote, for fear the comments would be too offensive for our readers.

The death threat now provides our readers with the proper context for understanding these comments, which are as follows. They will not be suitable for some readers:

“Your ‘Pastor” is a BIGOT…..and [expletive deleted] CRAZY.”

“You sick (expletive deleted)!  You have nothing to offer except hate, bigotry, and lies.  …homosexuality is not a sickness and you know it. It is perfectly normal. If anything is a sickness and a scourge, it is your hatred. Excuse me while I go puke.”

“The real sin is not treating all people equal. You will all burn in hell.”

Here is more:

“Please pray that people in Maine see through the charade of religious (expletive deleted) spewed by Rev. Heath. He is NOT a Christian. He needs to simply shut up. Just because same-sex marriage, which was voted on by a majority (heterosexuals) to discriminate against a minority (homosexuals) doesn’t mean it was right.”

“You people are devil worshipers and are going to (phrase deleted) and get nailed to a cross by a man in leather chaps listening to Barbara Streisand and the rest of the world will cheer for your slow painful death. [Expletive Deleted] [Expletive Deleted] [Expletive Deleted]”

“Seriously…Jesus would hate you. Everyone else does. You are sinners and not Christians. Again [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] do the world a favor by slitting your throats and the rest of your congregation too. [expletive deleted]  Pray for yourselves you idiots. You are the ones who will burn in hell… not believing in equality for all. God hates you. and you know it deep down inside.”

The League immediately reported the death threat against Heath to the Augusta Police Department, which is investigating the incident.