Americans for Truth

Should this very confused man, “transgender” activist Autumn Sandeen, be allowed to use the female restroom?

From Family Research Council President Tony Perkins’ May 30 “Washington Update”:

Congress may be adjourned for the Memorial Day recess, but a series of misguided state bills aren’t providing any relief for pro-family groups. Just ask the residents of Colorado, where locals are bracing themselves for an “anti-bias” law that is actually changing where people use the restroom. Yesterday, over the protests of thousands of families, Gov. Bill Ritter (D) signed SB 200 into law. The legislation blurs the sexual lines by making all public accommodations, including locker rooms and restrooms, “gender-free.” In other words, anyone–regardless of their biological identity–will be welcome in the men’s or ladies’ room, including cross-dressers, men who self-identify as women, women who self-identify as men, and people who haven’t made up their minds. To make matters worse, Colorado defines “public accommodations” as everything from malls, restaurants, and schools to small and even home businesses. The other side says this is about discrimination. But the chance of offending a few people hardly justifies putting everyone else at risk, which is exactly what SB 200 does.

For every transvestite who takes advantage of this law, there are a dozen sexual predators who will see this as a chance to put women and children into a vulnerable situation. Focus on the Family launched a statewide awareness campaign, but in the end, even Colorado’s largest Christian ministry couldn’t compete with Ritter’s desire to pay off liberal financier Tim Gill, who sank serious dollars into the governor’s election campaign in 2006. From here all eyes will turn to Montgomery County, [Maryland], where a November ballot initiative will determine the fate of its bathroom bill. [See www.notmyshower.com for information about the Maryland battle.–Ed.]

To sign up for Family Research Council’s “Washington Update” and other e-mail publications, click HERE.

“HIV is a gay disease,” admitted Matt Foreman of the extremist homosexualist group, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. If even leftists like Foreman can admit (sort of) to the high risks associated with homosexual behaviors, why are schools promoting this lifestyle to vulnerable students? For more on homosexuality-related health dangers, see this study and this FDA report explaining why the government bans blood donations from men who have sex with men (MSM).

Published by CWA, April 14, 2008

By J. Matt Barber

Can you imagine officials at a middle school, junior high or high school setting aside a day to promote “tolerance” for heavy smoking and drinking among children? How about a day where teachers encourage kids to “embrace who they are,” pick up that crack pipe and give it a stiff toke?

Neither can I. The public would go ballistic, and for good reason.

But that hasn’t stopped officials in thousands of schools across the country from promoting other politically correct and socially “in-vogue” behaviors that - both statistically and manifestly - are every bit as dangerous as the aforementioned “frowned-upon” behaviors.
That’s exactly what the homosexual activist “Day of Silence” is all about - advancing, through clever, feel-good propaganda, full acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle among children.

Just the Facts Ma’am

By recently admitting that “HIV is a gay disease,” Matt Foreman, outgoing executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, acknowledged what the medical community has known for decades: the homosexual lifestyle is extremely high-risk and often leads to disease and even death.

Read the rest of this article »

Compares Opposition to Homosexuality to Racism

Mel White and his homosexual lover, Gary Nixon, as shown on his group Soulforce’s website. Evangelical leftist Jim Wallis calls White a “gay Christian” in his new book. White smears Christians who adhere to Biblical teachings on homosexuality by accusing them of “spiritual violence” against homosexuals.

What is striking about the quotation below from Jim Wallis’ book, “The Great Awakening: Reviving Faith & Politics in Post-Religious Right America” (which he promoted at his recent speech at Wheaton College) is that while he accuses the late Rev. Jerry Falwell of “inflammatory language,” he ignores the same from homosexual activist Mel White, whom he labels a “gay Christian.” White and his group Soulforce accuse churches and Christian leaders who defend Biblical teachings against homosexuality of “spiritual violence” against “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people” — a calculated verbal smear that deliberately conflates defenders of God’s revealed truth with spiritual bullying.

Why doesn’t Wallis call upon Mel White to heal the “wounds” he has caused faithful Christians by castigating them for upholding Biblical truth?

Can you be a faithful Christian and a homosexual activist? We say no — any more than you could be a faithful Christian and an adultery activist, or a pornography activist, or an abortion-on-demand activist. Sin is sin. Mel White, who left his wife and family to enter into a sexual relationship with another man and pursue homosexual activism, is a rebel against God, albeit an eloquent one. Unfortunately, his ally Jim Wallis sees the greater danger coming from defenders of Biblical morality, rather than those like White who are working diligently to undermine and redefine it. — Peter LaBarbera

The following is found on page 303 of Wallis’ book Great Awakening:

“It would have been nice to hear that Jerry Falwell, too, had moved to embrace a broader agenda than just abortion and homosexuality. Rev. Falwell, who was admittedly racist during the civil rights movement, in later years was honored by the Lynchburg NAACP for his turnabout on the issue of race, showing the famous founder of the Religious Right’s capacity to grow and change. But recently on television I saw the pain on the face of gay Christian Mel White, who lamented that despite the efforts of himself and others, Falwell never moderated his strong and often inflammatory language (even if maintaining his religious convictions) against gay and lesbian people. They still feel the most wounded by the fundamentalist minister’s statements; that healing had yet to be done.”

By Laurie Higgins 

I, as a parent of two Wheaton students, was concerned about the recent invitation by Wheaton College’s Center for Applied Christian Ethics (CACE) to Jim Wallis to speak. I was concerned in that it followed close on the heels of the appearance at CACE of Harry Knox, director of the Religion and Faith Program of the [homosexual activist organization] Human Rights Campaign (HRC), and the campus visit of Soulforce [another homosexual activist group] whose members were permitted to distribute literature on campus. Some of us who deeply love Wheaton College were, with reason, concerned that Wallis might have attempted, like Harry Knox, to efface the violation of God’s design and moral order that homosexual conduct represents. We were not only concerned about the ostensible pedagogical purposes for which Wallis was invited, but also concerned that he might deviate from those purposes to discuss homosexuality, as did Harry Knox who had been invited to discuss HIV, but moved considerably beyond the topic of HIV to discuss his own homosexuality.

Read the rest of this article »

 Matt Foreman, outgoing National Gay and Lesbian Task Force executive director admits, “HIV is a gay disease.”

URGENT ALERT TO HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVIST ”FACT CHECKERS”  AND “ANTI-HOMOPHOBIA” BLOGGERS EVERYWHERE: somebody straighten out homosexual activist Matt Foreman, outgoing executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, who had the temerity to admit the obvious: “HIV is a gay disease.”  Next thing you know, Foreman — who is actually one of America’s most strident anti-Christian bigots … er, “gay” leaders — will be acknowledging that men and women practicing homosexuality can leave the lifestyle and lead contented lives outside the “gay” fold. 

Government’s fault? 

The Gay Thought Police need not be too alarmed: pro-family stalwart Gary Glenn of AFA-Michigan subsequently informed us that Foreman, talking to a Detroit homosexual newspaper, added this caveat to his statement about HIV and homosexuality: “I dont blame our community for the fact that MSM [men who have sex with men] still account for nearly three quarters of men living with HIV. I hold our government accountable.”

Whew, I’m glad Foreman straightened that out!  For a moment there, I thought were were going to witness a major homosexual leader actually encouraging “gay” men to take responsibility for their own sexual (mis)behavior. 

In a future post, we’ll address some of Foreman’s other remarks at Creating Change – which might cause conservatives consternation but which should have a sobering effect on the pro-family movement.  (Here’s a clue: they’re gaining; we’re losing.) – Peter LaBarbera

P.S.  Click HERE  and HERE if you missed our stories about the homosexual Task Force and Creating Change honoring a sadomasochistic advocate of “consensual slavery” at their Detroit conference — during Black History Month, no less.

P.P.S.  Public school sex-ed instructors and educators everywhere, take note:  

American Family Association of Michigan 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wed., Feb. 13, 2008
CONTACT:  Gary Glenn  989-835-7978

National Gay & Lesbian Task Force Admits: “HIV is a Gay Disease”

Michigan family values group welcomes admission,
urges lawmakers to block homosexual “rights” legislation

DETROIT, Mich. — A Michigan family values organization Wednesday welcomed the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force’s startling admission that homosexual activity is predominantly responsible for the spread of the HIV virus in the U.S. and called on Michigan legislative leaders to block pending legislation that would give special “protected class” status to individuals who engage in such behavior.

Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force — in an address Friday to the National Conference on Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Equality [”Creating Change”; see AFTAH article HERE] in Detroit — shocked attendees by calling HIV “a gay disease.”  Despite medical data identifying homosexual activity among males as by far the largest single source of HIV infection in the U.S., homosexual activists have routinely have condemned conservative and public health organizations for characterizing the disease as being predominantly associated with and spread by homosexual behavior.

Foreman further shocked attendees by himself referring to such data, saying that “with 70 percent of the people in this country living with HIV being gay or bi[-sexual], we cannot deny that HIV is a gay disease. We have to own that and face up to that.”

Read the rest of this article »

We apologize: we initially posted to the wrong CWA interview in our initial post: 

Click HERE to listen to Concerned Women for America’s online interview yesterday between Matt Barber and Robert Knight. Less than a week after Reuters drew national attention to a study about an outbreak of the deadly MRSA staph infection among homosexuals engaging in risky behavior, follow-up articles started appearing that seemed to downplay the findings, attack the researchers and demonize pro-family groups that commented on it. Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, and Knight, Director of the Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute, discuss these often-used tactics by radical homosexuals to avoid inconvenient truths. You can also go HERE to CWA’s website to listen to or download the interview.

Barber did a previous interview with AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera, which you can listen to by clicking HERE, or by connecting from this page on the CWA website.

 C-SPAN helped homosexual Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire Vicky Gene Robinson — he was named such because his parents wanted a girl — plead his heretical case to America by airing his speech twice on Christmas Eve night. In the speech, Robinson discussed his plan to enter into a “civil union” with his homosexual lover, saying he always wanted to be a “June bride.” The bishop claimed (against all evidence in Scripture) that the Holy Spirit is involved in the crusade for more open homosexuals like him in the clergy. Write C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb (viewer@c-span.org) or call him (202-737-3220) to protest this holiday programming choice that was deeply offensive to Bible-believing Christians. Urge C-SPAN to balance Robinson’s lecture by covering a presentation by evangelical Dr. Michael Brown in Charlotte, North Carolina next month titled, “Can you be gay and Christian?”  Photo by C-SPAN.

By Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION: Write (viewer@c-span.org) or call C-SPAN (202-737-3220) CEO Brian Lamb today or tomorrow to object to their airing of a speech by a controversial homosexual-clergy activist and Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire, Vicky Gene Robinson, twice on Christmas Eve.  Politely urge C-SPAN to compensate for this offensive, pro-homosexual coverage by sending their cameras to cover evangelical apologist Dr. Michael Brown and his upcoming conference, ”Can you be gay and Christian?” to be held Feb. 11-15 in Charlotte, N.C. 

________________________

I’m wondering why C-SPAN chose to re-air a long speech by homosexual activist and Episcopal Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson on Christmas Eve, one of the most sacred days on the Christian calendar. In his speech Nov. 27 at Nova Southeastern University in Ft. Lauderdale, “How Morality Plays a Role in Legal Rights, Especially for the Gay Community,” which had already been aired on Dec. 8, Robinson claimed that the Holy Spirit was involved in the crusade for homosexual “inclusion” in the clergy.

First things first: did you know that the infamously ”gay” bishop’s first name is “Vicky” (as you can see above, C-SPAN only put “Gene Robinson” on the screen). Apparently his parents really wanted a girl and — when they doubted their sickly newborn would even live — they named him accordingly: Vicky Imogene (middle name after the mother) Robinson. In 2003, the Concord Monitor reported matter-of-factly (as only the agnostic media can) on the birth of the baby who would become Episcopal “Rev. V. Gene Robinson” as follows:

Robinson was born in Lexington, Ky., in 1947, in a delivery that went so wrong the doctor told his father he needed a name for the baby’s birth and death certificates. Charles and Imogene Robinson had counted on a girl, so Robinson’s father named the baby Vicky Imogene Robinson.

Now, common sense dictates that if you do not want your boy to struggle with masculinity or gender issues, perhaps it is not a good idea to name him “Vicky,” or Susan, or Linda. In this BBC video interview, Robinson calls his father’s decision to give him a girl’s name “a terrible thing to do to a boy child.” 

Indeed, but it gets worse.

Read the rest of this article »

 Homosexual “conservative” pundit Andrew Sullivan wrote sympathetically aboug ”gay” male couples’ ‘understanding of the need for extramarital [sexual] outlets” and suggested such “honesty” and “flexibility” could “undoubtedly help strengthen and inform many heterosexual bonds.”

____________________________

Emphasis in bold is added to all quotations below: 

‘Extramarital Outlets’ and Homosexual ‘Monogamy’

“The mutual nurturing and sexual expressiveness of many lesbian relationships, the solidity and space of many adult gay male relationships, are qualities sometimes lacking in more rote, heterosexual couplings.”
–Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality, p. 202, (1995)

“Some of this is unavailable to the male-female union: there is more likely to be greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman; and again, the lack of children gives gay couples greater freedom. Their failures entail fewer consequences for others. But something of the gay’s relationship’s necessary honesty, its flexibility, and its equality could undoubtedly help strengthen and inform many heterosexual bonds.”
–Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal, pp. 202-03.

Radically Alter an ‘Archaic Institution’

“A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.”
–Michelangelo Signorile, “Bridal Wave,” OUT magazine, December/January 1994, p. 161.

Ending Marriage’s ‘Sexist Trappings’

“[E]nlarging the [marital] concept to embrace same-sex couples would necessarily transform it into something new….Extending the right to marry to gay people — that is, abolishing the traditional gender requirements of marriage — can be one of the means, perhaps the principal one, through which the institution divests itself of the sexist trappings of the past.”
–the late homosexual activist Tom Stoddard, quoted in Roberta Achtenberg, et al, “Approaching 2000: Meeting the Challenges to San Francisco’s Families,” The Final Report of the Mayor’s Task Force on Family Policy, City and County of San Francisco, June 13, 1990, p.1.

Transform the Definition of Family 

“[Legalizing “same-sex marriage”] is also a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us.”
–Michelangelo Signorile, “I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,” OUT magazine, May 1996, p. 30.

‘Being Queer Means Transforming the Very Fabric of Society’ 

“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. … Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. … As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. …In arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. … We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society’s view of reality.”
–Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?” in William Rubenstein, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405.

New Gay Model: Monogamy Not Essential for Marriage

“Gay life, like black culture, might even provide models and materials for rethinking family life and improving family law. I will now chart some ways in which this might be so — in particular drawing on the distinctive experience and ideals of gay male couples.

“Take sex. Traditionally, a commitment to monogamy — to the extent that it was not simply an adjunct of property law, a vehicle for guaranteeing property rights and succession — was the chief mode of sacrifice imposed upon or adopted by married couples as a means of showing their sacred valuing of their relation. But gay men have realized that while couples may choose to restrict sexual activity in order to show their love for each other, it is not necessary for this purpose; there are many other ways to manifest and ritualize commitment. And so monogamy (it appears) is not an essential component of love and marriage. The authors of “The Male Couple” found that:

[T]he majority of [gay male] couples, and all of the couples together for longer than five years, were not continuously sexually exclusive with each other. Although many had long periods of sexual exclusivity, it was not the ongoing expectation for most. We found that gay men expect mutual emotional dependability with their partners [but also believe] that relationship fidelity transcends concerns about sexuality and exclusivity.

Both because marital sacrifices must be voluntary to be meaningful and because sexual exclusivity is not essential to marital commitment, the law should not impose monogamy on married couples. And indeed, half the states have decriminalized adultery.
–Homosexual academic Richard D. Mohr, The Case for Gay Marriage, 9 NOTRE DAME J.L. ETHICS & PUB. POLICY 215, 233 (1995)

Churches: Homophobic, Antiquated Backwaters

“We can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings in psychology. Against the mighty pull of institutional religion, one must set up the mightier draw of science and public opinion…. Such an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion.”
–Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of Straight America,” homosexual magazine The Guide, November 1987.

Make Anti-Gays Look Nasty

“We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.”
–Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of Straight America,” The Guide (homosexual) magazine, November 1987.