RIMMING: Section on "Rimming" from flier produced for the California HIV/AIDS Hotline. "Rimming" is a slang term for oral-anal sexual stimulation, as depicted by the drawing above. The text reads: "You cannot get HIV from rimming. You can get Hepatitis A (but you can get vaccinated against it), shigella, herpes, and intestinal parasites. To reduce your chances of getting sick, clean ass before you eat it, or use a dental dam as a barrier between your mouth and your partner's ass."

TAKE ACTION: Share this disturbing information with your adult friends, family and co-workers — as well as your U.S. Senators and Congressman [Senate 202-224-3121; House: 202-225-3121; www.congress.org].  Urge your representatives in Congress to put the safety of Americans — and a pristine blood supply — ahead of the demands of the selfish Homosexuality Lobby.  Also urge your representatives to launch a Congressional investigation into the health hazards of homosexual behaviors (just as the government studied the dangers of smoking).  We need the government to regulate the commercialized “gay” sex industry (e.g. bathhouses) – which fosters anonymous perversions and a reckless culture of promiscuity that spreads diseases and ultimately endangers innocents.

________________________________

“Infection with these parasites was a likely effect of anal intercourse, which was apt to put a man in contact with his partner’s fecal matter, and was virtually a certainty through the then-popular practice of rimming, which medical journals politely call anal-oral intercourse.” – Homosexual reporter Randy Shilts, who died of AIDS at 42,writing in his book, And the Band Played On, pp. 18-19.

By Peter LaBarbera

Here we reproduce portions of a flier produced by the Asian Health Services and funded by the California AIDS Clearinghouse — as AFTAH launches its “Keep the Gay Blood Ban” (KGB²) campaign against renewed lobby efforts to open up the U.S. blood supply to homosexuality-practicing men. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), one-time Democratic candidate for president, has stepped up his efforts to overturn the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) current ban on blood donations from any ‘man who has had sex with a man’ (MSM) since 1977 (and any woman who has had sex with such a man).

In the House, Sen. Kerry is being aided by Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Chicago), who represents the homosexual Boystown neighborhood in Chicago, and the two recently applauded Obama’s HHS (Department of Health and Human Services) for taking steps toward lifting the homosexual blood ban.

Sadly, Sen. Kerry and others crusading against the homosexual blood ban do so on the basis that the ban is mainly about ”anti-gay discrimination” rather than preserving public health. Kerry previously cited the advent of legalized homosexual “marriage” as mitigating against the lifetime homosexual blood ban. Yet few seem interested in investigating — much less restricting — the actual high-risk homosexual practices and deviant behaviors depicted and described in this (pro-”gay’) flier, which crassly helps explain the immense heath risks of male homosexuality. We excerpt this flier — vulgar slang references and all — to help educate the public as to how this lifestyle is so dangerous that men who practice it must be kept from the nation’s blood supply.

The politically incorrect reality is that male-on-male sex and the “gay” sexual culture are extremely high-risk due directly to the dangerously perverse and unsanitary acts – and unprecedented promiscuity — practiced by “men who have sex with men.” Such behaviors fueled the AIDS crisis in the first place, as documented by homosexual reporter Randy Shilts in his book “And the Band Played On” (1987) [Click HERE to see excerpt from Shilts at bottom.]

AFTAH will present raw homosexual reality

As part of our “Keep the Gay Blood Ban” (KGB²) campaign, AFTAH will present the reality of homosexual BEHAVIOR  – using “gay” and pro-homosexual sources (largely uncensored). Much of it — like this California AIDS flier – will be shocking to the uninitiated, but we hope to provide an alternative to the dominant pro-homosexual political culture narrative that invariably excludes the single-most important factor in this debate — and any discussion surrounding homosexuality: homosexual behavior.

RISKS OF ANAL SEX. Click on graphic to enlarge. California AIDS flier discusses risks of anal sex. TOP PANEL READS, in part: "Can I get HIV as a top? It's less likely but, yes, it's possible to get HIV by topping, especially if you regularly f**k without a condom. Studies show that men with foreskins -- ED. NOTE - READ: uncircumcised men -- are more likely to contract HIV than men without." BOTTOM PANEL READS, in part: "Anal sex is the riskiest sexual activity for getting/spreading HIV. That risk goes up if you have more sex partners, if you f**k without a condom, or if you have sex with someone who has HIV. Of course, you can't always know if your partners have HIV. That's why some men choose to assume that all their sex partners are HIV-positive....If you're using drugs like poppers or meth, you should know that f**cking while high can increase the likelihood of anal tearing, which also puts you at higher risk for HIV and other STDs."

Why aren’t teenage boys being warned?

One other point: this flier and similarly frank homosexual literature conveys the harsh, shocking realities of homosexual sexual behavior. When teenage and even pre-teen boys idealistically embrace “being gay” as “who they are” — encouraged by pro-homosexual adults and the ubiquitous pro-”gay” messages in pop culture – do they have any inkling of the serious and even deadly health repercussions of this lifestyle choice?

When Hollywood elites glamorize homosexual teen male romances on programs like “Glee,” [see Glee's infamous teenage boy homosexual kiss HERE] shouldn’t they include warnings about the far less glamorous side of same-sex conduct? Shouldn’t boys embracing homosexuality be forewarned about the disproportionate risk of HIV, hepatitis, anal warts, herpes, etc., — all linked to unnatural homosexual behaviors?

Also, although many homosexual activists surely will object to this report on the basis that not all homosexual men are promiscuous or practice dangerous behaviors like sodomy and rimming — what is curious is that the United States government – even when led by Republicans — has taken precious little action against the “gay” sex industry and LGBT activism that facilitate the very promiscuity that has a long history of causing and spreading disease. Concerned more with decrying “homophobia” than encouraging public-health-promoting action against homosexual sex clubs, the the federal CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has left the “gay” bathhouse and sex-club industry untouched, and so it flourishes. Indeed, even in the CDC’s home city of Atlanta, three anonymous homosexual sex establishments operate without fear. Some ‘control and prevention.’…

FDA explains homosexual blood ban

The following are excerpts from an FDA fact sheet explaining the homosexual male blood donation ban (emphasis added):

• Men who have had sex with other men, at any time since 1977 (the beginning of the AIDS epidemic in the United States) are currently deferred as blood donors. This is because MSM are, as a group, at increased risk for HIV, hepatitis B and certain other infections that can be transmitted by transfusion.
• A history of male-to-male sex is associated with an increased risk for the presence of and transmission of certain infectious diseases, including HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. FDA’s policy is intended to protect all people who receive blood transfusions from an increased risk of exposure to potentially infected blood and blood products.
• Men who have had sex with men since 1977 have an HIV prevalence (the total number of cases of a disease that are present in a population at a specific point in time) 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first time blood donors and 8000 times higher than repeat blood donors (American Red Cross). Even taking into account that 75% of HIV infected men who have sex with men already know they are HIV positive and would be unlikely to donate blood, the HIV prevalence in potential donors with history of male sex with males is 200 times higher than first time blood donors and 2000 times higher than repeat blood donors.

What will Obama’s HHS do?

ANAL SEX AND BLEEDING. Panel reads: "Is it normal to bleed after anal sex? Bleeding immediately after anal sex is common for many men. Blood may come from hemorrhoids, a tear in the anal lining, polyps or tumors in the colon, or some type of infection. The seriousness of anal bleeding can only be assessed by a doctor. If you continue to bleed for more than a few days after anal sex, contact a clinic."

Sen.  Kerry plans to work closely with the Administration on repealing the “gay” blook donation ban. In his statement against what he calls the “outdated” homosexual blood ban, Kerry states: “It’s a very positive step that HHS is meeting this week to reconsider the lifetime ban on gay Americans donating blood.  The medical and scientific communities have been crystal clear that there is no longer any scientific evidence to warrant this policy…I’ve been working closely with members from both chambers, and we look forward to hearing HHS’s recommendations and working with the Administration to ensure that an outdated policy is brought into line with the world we live in today.”

The FDA contradicts Kerry’s claim that there is “no longer any scientific evidence” supporting the ban. It continues:

• Men who have had sex with men account for the largest single group of blood donors who are found HIV positive by blood donor testing.
• Blood donor testing using current advanced technologies has greatly reduced the risk of HIV transmission but cannot yet detect all infected donors or prevent all transmission by transfusions. While today’s highly sensitive tests fail to detect less than one in a million HIV infected donors, it is important to remember that in the US there are over 20 million transfusions of blood, red cell concentrates, plasma or platelets every year. Therefore, even a failure rate of 1 in a million can be significant if there is an increased risk of undetected HIV in the blood donor population.
• Detection of HIV infection is particularly challenging when very low levels of virus are present in the blood for example during the so-called “window period”. The “window period” is the time between being infected with HIV and the ability of an HIV test to detect HIV in an infected person.
• FDA’s MSM policy reduces the likelihood that a person would unknowingly donate blood during the “window period” of infection. This is important because the rate of new infections in MSM is higher than in the general population and current blood donors.
• Collection of blood from persons with an increased risk of HIV infection also presents an added risk if blood were to be accidentally given to a patient in error either before testing is completed or following a positive test. Such medical errors occur very rarely, but given that there are over 20 million transfusions every year, in the USA, they can occur. That is one more reason why FDA and other regulatory authorities work to assure that there are multiple safeguards, not just testing.
• Several scientific models show there would be a small but definite increased risk to people who receive blood transfusions if FDA’s MSM policy were changed and that preventable transfusion transmission of HIV could occur as a result.
• No alternate set of donor eligibility criteria (even including practice of safe sex or a low number of lifetime partners) has yet been found to reliably identify MSM who are not at increased risk for HIV or certain other transfusion transmissible infections.
• Today, the risk of getting HIV from a transfusion or a blood product has been nearly eliminated in the United States. Improved procedures, donor screening for risk of infection and laboratory testing for evidence of HIV infection have made the United States blood supply safer than ever. While appreciative and supportive of the desire of potential blood donors to contribute to the health of others, FDA’s first obligation is to assure the safety of the blood supply and protect the health of blood recipients.
• Men who have sex with men also have an increased risk of having other infections that can be transmitted to others by blood transfusion. For example, infection with the Hepatitis B virus is about 5-6 times more common and Hepatitis C virus infections are about 2 times more common in men who have sex with other men than in the general population. Additionally, men who have sex with men have an increased incidence and prevalence of Human Herpes Virus-8 (HHV-8). HHV-8 causes a cancer called Kaposi’s sarcoma in immunocompromised individuals.

The past is prologue

ANAL WARTS, HPV and ANAL CANCER. Click on graphic to enlarge. Panel reads, in part: "What are anal warts? They're fleshy, painless growths that can appear in and around the anus. Warts are caused by the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). It's estimated that the majority of sexually-active gay men have already been exposed to HPV. You can't get tested for HPV, but there are a few things you can do. If you have warts, get them treated -- you'll be more comfortable, and you'll be less likely to spread the virus to your partners. HPV has also been found to be associated with anal cancer. Even if you don't have warts, you can still care a strain of HPV that causes cancer. If you bottom -- ED. NOTE: this means serving as the recipient "bottom" in anal sodomy -- ask your doctor for an anal Pap smear every few years to check for early signs of cancer (yes, men can get Paps too!)...."

The connection between disease and unnatural — and bizarrely perverse — homosexual acts goes back to the roots of the “gay revolution” in America. Randy Shilts, who himself died of AIDS at 42, wrote of pre-1980 “gay-liberated” San Francisco in his book, And the Band Played On:

The fight against venereal diseases was proving a Sisyphean task….In San Francisco, two-thirds of gay men had suffered the debilitating disease [hepatitis B]. It was now proven statistically that a gay man had one chance in five of being infected with the hepatitis B virus within twelve months of stepping off the bus into a typical urban gay scene. Within five years, infection was a virtual certainty.

Another problem was enteric diseases, like amebiasis and giardiasis, caused by organisms that lodged themselves in the intestinal tracts of gay men with alarming frequency. At the New York Gay Men’s Health Project…30 percent of the patients suffered from gastrointestinal parasites. In San Francisco, incidence of the “Gay Bowel Syndrome,” as it was called in medical journals, had increased by 8,000 percent after 1973. Infection with these parasites was a likely effect of anal intercourse, which was apt to put a man in contact with his partner’s fecal matter, and was virtually a certainty through the then-popular practice of rimming, which medical journals politely call anal-oral intercourse.

What was troubling was that nobody in the gay community seemed to care about these waves of infection…

[The] commercialization of gay sex was all part of the scene, an aspect of the homosexual life-style in which the epidemics of venereal disease, hepatitis, and enteric disorders thrived. The gay liberation movement of the 1970s had spawned a business of bathhouses and sex clubs…[S]ex was part and parcel of political liberation. The popular bestseller The Joy of Gay Sex, for example, called rimming the “prime taste treat in sex,” while a leftist Toronto newspaper published a story on “rimming as a revolutionary act.” – Shilts, “And the Band Played On,” pp. 18-19

Revolutionary, indeed. And as you can see from this current AIDS flier, the revolution lives on.

]]> http://americansfortruth.com/2011/08/05/keep-the-gay-blood-ban-california-aids-flier-exposes-extreme-risks-of-homosexual-sex/feed/ 0 http://americansfortruth.com/2011/06/01/labarbera-illinois-anti-christian-civil-unions-law-must-be-repealed/ http://americansfortruth.com/2011/06/01/labarbera-illinois-anti-christian-civil-unions-law-must-be-repealed/#comments Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:45:57 +0000 Peterlab http://americansfortruth.com/?p=9379

Pro-family advocates in Chicago rally against the new "Civil Unions" law in Illinois. The bill, HB 1716, was passed in a lame-duck session and ironically called the "Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act" despite the fact that its passage immediately put Illinois citizens' religious and First Amendment liberties in jeopardy. Photo by Lynn Thomas; click to enlarge.

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (www.aftah.org); June 1, 2011

Contact: Peter LaBarbera: 630-717-7631; americansfortruth@gmail.com

CHICAGO–Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality and a principal behind the Illinois Defense of Marriage Initiative (www.DefendMarriageIL.org), issued the following statement on the new Illinois “Civil Unions” law that takes effect today:

Homosexual behavior is always wrong, according to the broad sweep of Judeo-Christian history, so it is tragic to behold the State of Illinois – or any government entity – recognizing immoral same-sex relationships and treating them like marriage. Moreover, for the City of Chicago and Gov. Pat Quinn to celebrate homosexuality with a mass Civil Union ceremony June 2^nd is an act of hubris and defiance toward the Creator that mocks His wonderful plan for real marriage – the sacred union of a man and a woman to produce children and family. The pandering Quinn – epitomizing the modern Democratic politician –mocks his own professed Catholicism by working tirelessly to undermine its clear moral dictates.

The anti-Christian Civil Unions law must be repealed. It was passed in a lame-duck session that once again revealed the contempt that liberal Illinois lawmakers have for the citizens they are supposed to serve. Ironically, shortly after passage of this bill – mischievously titled the Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act –religious liberty for Illinois citizens and religious institutions was immediately put in jeopardy. A homosexual male couple targeted Paxton, Illinois, bed-and-breakfast owners Jim and Beth Walder – who now face prosecution by the State because they refuse – as Christians – to hold “civil union” ceremonies celebrating homosexuality on their own business property. And the Rockford Diocese’s Catholic Charities announced that it will halt its state-funded foster care and adoption services rather than be forced by the State of Illinois to place children in same-sex households that are motherless or fatherless by design.

These sad developments in the Land of Lincoln constitute further proof that homosexuality-based “rights” and religious freedom cannot co-exist. “Gay” activism – empowered by Illinois’ “sexual orientation” law and the new Civil Unions law — will drive out the free expression of religion and morality, which must include the right to oppose sexual behavior historically regarded as disordered and sinful. (Thankfully, homosexuality is also changeable, as evidenced by Chicago Christian ex-lesbian Linda Jernigan, who spoke at Friday’s rally launching the Illinois Defense of Marriage Initiative.)  [Upcoming Event Notice: Jernigan will be giving a dinner-lecture at AFTAH's office in Carol Stream, IL, 25W560 Geneva Rd., on Friday, June 17th, on the topic "What's Wrong with 'Gay Pride'?"; e-mail us for more information: americansfortruth@gmail.com.]

Already, there are “conservative, pro-family” defeatists who argue that the radical Civil Unions bill cannot be repealed. It’s funny how “gay” activists never display such timidity. The well-financed Homosexual Lobby sees “Civil Unions” as a mere pathway to full, legalized “same-sex marriage.” We must work diligently to repeal this anti-Christian law, while also collecting 300,000 signatures to put a referendum on “same-sex marriage” on the Illinois ballot in 2012. Also, we will continue to push for House Speaker Mike Madigan to stop blocking a vote on a binding constitutional marriage amendment that will permanently prevent the radical redefinition of marriage in our state.

AFTAH News Release, Dember 18, 2010

Contact: Peter LaBarbera: 630-717-7631; americansfortruth@gmail.com

Sen. Joe Lieberman's phoney piety is exposed by his emergence as a leading crusader in Congress for the homosexual agenda.

CHICAGO – As most Americans shop and begin making preparations for Christmas or their religious holiday, the U.S. Senate, led by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (independent), is busy securing a vote to effectively homosexualize our Armed Forces.  [Call your Senators at 202-224-3121 to oppose the repeal of the law banning open homosexuality in the military (commonly called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”).]

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, which opposes the “gay” activist agenda, said today’s vote, potentially clearing the way for repealing the military ban, is the most important homosexuality-related congressional vote ever held: “If the lame-duck Congress succeeds in ‘gaying down’ our military this weekend, it will take a disastrous leap toward “mainstreaming” deviant, sinful homosexual conduct – not just in the military but in larger society — thus further propelling America’s moral downward spiral.

“This is a needless injection of sexual politics into our Armed Forces,” LaBarbera said, noting that the President’s own DoD report on implementing the Repeal reveals:

• 23.7 percent of surveyed Service members (38.1 percent of Marines) said repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would cause them to “leave [the military] sooner than I planned” or “think about leaving sooner than I had planned”;

• 44.3 percent of combat veterans (59.4 percent of Marines) said that having an open homosexual in their immediate unit in the field or at sea would “Negatively” or “Very Negatively” affect their “unit’s effectiveness at completing its mission”;

Calling the Repeal a “civil rights measure,” Lieberman said, “The days should be over when we let civil rights measures be filibustered so they can’t be adopted.’’

LaBarbera observed:

• Shame on Joe Lieberman – who professes to adhere to ancient Jewish moral law – for confusing the noble civil rights cause with an agenda that seeks to normalize destructive homosexual behavior. Lieberman is wrong: homosexuality is not the basis for “civil rights,” which In the past has been based on unchangeable skin color – not sexual misconduct that can be resisted or changed (as evidenced by thousands of former homosexuals who now live happy lives in accordance with God’s will);
• Americans are tired of religious phoneys like Lieberman – politicians who use their religion as a PR prop while actively undermining its moral dictates. Claiming to be an “observant” Jew, Lieberman wears his religion on his sleeve (perhaps he will walk, not drive, on the Jewish Sabbath Day today to cast his pro-homosexuality vote!).  Stealing the moral authority of “civil rights” is the only way Lieberman can rationalize his role as a crusader for the ‘Gay’ Lobby on Capitol Hill — when His religion, a form of Orthodox Judaism, condemns homosexual acts as an “abomination”;
• There are no “ex-Blacks”; there are many ex-“gays.” This helps explain the difference between President Truman’s noble reform to racially integrate African Americans into the military – and President Obama’s misguided push for open homosexuals in the military, which is really about pandering to his liberal, pro-“gay” political base.

Said Brian Camenker, founder of the pro-family group Mass Resistance, who attends an Orthodox synagogue in the Boston area:

“Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who has the incredible chutzpah to call himself an Orthodox Jew, will desecrate the holy Sabbath to go to work – the U.S. Senate – and vote to force the integration of homosexuality into the U.S. military. He is a shameful disgrace and an embarrassment to Orthodox Jews everywhere.”

Psychologist Mike Campion was vindicated when the City of Minneapolis settled with him for $211,000 rather than try to prove in court their false charge that he was an anti-gay bigot who could not professionally do his job of evaluating police and firefighter candidates -- due to his past affiliation with a Christian pro-family group.

“Former City Council Member Scott Benson, who is gay and a lawyer, sent a note to then-interim Police Chief Tim Dolan and asked, ‘How did Dr. Michael Campion, who was a board member of the Illinois Family Institute (a notoriously discriminatory anti-gay group) become the psychologist for the Minneapolis Police Dept. for screening new hires etc?’

“The same month the city suspended work with Campion and hired another firm to do screening, citing better ‘diversity and transparency’ issues at the firm.” – Minneapolis Star Tribune, “Minneapolis settles suit with fired psychologist for $210,000″

By Peter LaBarbera

The City of Minneapolis just admitted its guilt and, in effect, shameful anti-Christian bigotry by settling with psychologist contractor Michael Campion for $210,000 rather than go forward with a U.S. District Court trial that it surely would have lost on First Amendment grounds. See the Minneapolis Star-Tribune article reprinted below. 

I know Mike Campion and his wife Kathy. He is a good and decent Christian man whom compassion-challenged liberals put through the grinder merely because he supports the objective truth that homosexuals can change their lifestyle (as countless have). His firm, Campion, Barrow & Associates, is one of the most professional in its field and evidently the City of Minneaopolis could not find anyone who would testify that Mr. Campion had mistreated or discriminated against them on the basis of “sexual orientation.”

In other words, unlike the liberals who sought to destroy him, Campion is no bigot. Pathetically, some city officials even tried to smear Campion as a racist to achieve their goal. End justifies the means, right?

Note the comment by homosexual activist Scott Benson above: a “gay” politician, working with pro-homosexual city officials, gets Campion fired because he was once a board member with a “notoriously discriminatory organization,” the Illinois Family Institute (IFI).

Most of AFTAH’s readers know of IFI, where I served as executive director from 2003-2006. This fine group and its followers merely defend the historic Christian and biblical teaching that homosexuality is outside of God’s expressed will. They believe that this sinful behavior is changeable through trusting in Jesus Christ, who in His grace and love and truth offers forgiveness to all sinners. Neither Mike nor IFI “hate” or “fear” homosexuals, and such spurious accusations — now tossed recklessly at any Bible-believer who expresses disagreement with sodomy, is itself a manifestation of reactionary, anti-Christian prejudice. 

Are you seeing the folly and frightening potential of this Orwellian sexual agenda: all across America and the world, homosexual activists are smearing Christians or even working aggressively to get them FIRED (or arrested) – in the name of “fighting discrimination”! The bald-faced hypocrisy of the pro-homosexual Left is exposed — and anyone not blinded by politically correctness (which unfortunately covers many in the media) can see it.

Truth is — as lesbian activist and Obama-appointed E.E.O.C. Commissioner Chai Feldblum asserts — there is a “zero-sum game” between homosexualist ideology/”sexual orientation”-based “rights” and our First Amendment freedoms. To the committed homosexualist, it doesn’t matter if you are black, white or brown – it only matters whether or not you affirm homosexuality. And if you don’t or, God forbid, you belong to a church or organization that questions the cherished myths of the powerful “Gay” Lobby, watch out! You could be in trouble with the Sexual Thought Police. (Read Julea Ward’s story HERE; Crystal Dixon’s story HERE; and Elaine Huguenin’s story HERE.)

How dare the liberal Left lecture us about ”rights” as they take away others’ rights and promote a vicious, new form of discrimination that cynically equates God-honoring moral convictions with “hate” and punishes them accordingly.

A new civil rights movement

The encouraging news is that the seeds of a new civil rights movement are growing — made up of Americans and citizens of all creeds and colors worldwide demanding that their freedom to live by their religious and moral beliefs be respected and made inviolable. This noble freedom-of-conscience movement will rise up against any and all attempts — government and corporate – to punish people for their deeply-held moral convictions. It will stand aggressively against laws and policies that belittle and demonize traditionalist and religious views – and which demand that our morality be shoved into some personal closet or church away from the workplace and public square.

America is a freedom-loving nation. We must not let it become a freedom-crushing nation, especially in the name of a misnamed ”tolerance” that will not tolerate dissent and a (non-diverse) “diversity” that punishes and maligns adherents of moral truth. (See my expulsion and then crude demonization by the curiously-named DiversityInc magazine and its hateful publisher, Luke Visconti.) In the spirit of our Founding Fathers, we will not tolerate government-enforced tyranny, and certainly not in the name of “rights” based on sexual misbehavior or any errant secularist cause that seeks to recast our God-given liberties to affirm worldly trends.

We understand that many social liberals hate us for defending biblical and moral truth, but that hatred does not allow them to steal way our rights. So, like past patriots, we WILL fight back against the Liberal, Pro-Gay Thought Police at every turn. Because our freedom — like Mike Campion’s — is non-negotiable.

__________________________________________

Star-Tribune article on Campion’s victory:

Minneapolis settles suit with fired psychologist for $210,000

Michael Campion was fired because of concerns over his ties to an “anti-homosexual” organization

By ROCHELLE OLSON, Star Tribune

September 3, 2010

A psychologist who screened potential Minneapolis police officers will receive a $210,000 settlement from the city over his firing, which stemmed from his affiliation with the Illinois Family Institute and his support for treating the “problem” of homosexuality.

The City Council unanimously agreed Friday after a closed-door session to pay Michael Campion of Campion, Barrow & Associates of Illinois Inc. (CBA) rather than go forward with a U.S. District Court trial scheduled to start Sept. 13 before U.S. Judge Joan Ericksen.

Council Member Gary Schiff, who is gay, said, “It was clear the settlement was in the city’s best interest.”

The Family Institute has stated that it opposes the “gay lifestyle.”

If the city had lost at trial, it could have been made to pay Campion’s attorney’s fees. Schiff said the settlement amount includes legal fees.

In reaching the decision, Schiff said, the council leaned heavily on an 18-page pretrial ruling from Ericksen, in which she wrote, “The court observes, at this preliminary state, that plaintiffs’ First Amendment interests appear to be strong.”

Jim Campbell, of the Alliance Defense Fund of Arizona, said the settlement “reinforces that the government cannot penalize Christian contractors for their beliefs.  The court had already issued a decision finding that the City of Minneapolis removed Dr. Campion because of his constitutionally protected involvement with a Christian organization, noting that Dr. Campion’s constitutional rights were strong.”

Schiff said the council realized that Ericksen’s ruling signaled an uphill legal fight.

CBA began working for the city in 2004, about a year after a federal mediator came to town to address concerns about biased policing and low numbers of minority officers. In 2006, members of the Police Community Relations Council, which grew out of the federal mediation, raised concerns about racial bias in CBA’s work. Another firm reviewed the work and found no such evidence.

Campion met with the community council in August 2006 and concerns were raised about his affiliation with the Family Institute, founded by James Dobson, and the “anti-homosexual” nature of the organization, the judge’s order said.

Former City Council Member Scott Benson, who is gay and a lawyer, sent a note to then-interim Police Chief Tim Dolan and asked, “How did Dr. Michael Campion, who was a board member of the Illinois Family Institute (a notoriously discriminatory anti-gay group) become the psychologist for the Minneapolis Police Dept. for screening new hires etc?”

The same month the city suspended work with Campion and hired another firm to do screening, citing better “diversity and transparency” issues at the firm.

CBA sued, claiming the city violated Campion’s First Amendment rights by taking action against him because of his association with the Family Institute.

The city argued that the decision to part ways with CBA stemmed not from Campion’s speech but by “concerns about bias.”

Campion’s business, based in Champaign, Ill., has performed psychological testing for 35 years for more than 100 law enforcement agencies, including St. Paul. A portion of Campion’s testing was developed through a U.S. Department of Justice grant in which he sampled St. Paul residents on what characteristics were important in an officer.

Before receiving the psychological exam, applicants are given a conditional job offer. If they are rated unqualified, they generally are not hired.

Campion has not commented on the case. His lawyers didn’t return a phone call.

Rochelle Olson • 612-673-1747

See related AFTAH article: “Focus on the Family Clarifies Position, Opposes Homosexual Judicial Nominees”

___________________________________

News Release – Americans For Truth

April 15, 2010; Contact: Peter LaBarbera: 630-717-7631; AmericansForTruth@comcast.net

LaBarbera Commends Focus for Clarifying Its Principled Opposition to Homosexual Judges

Peter LaBarbera, President of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), issued the following statement in response to Focus on the Family’s clarification that it would not support a homosexual nominee to the Supreme Court:

Focus on the Family has wisely corrected statements by two of its staffers who stated last year that the “sexual orientation” of judicial nominees – i.e., their homosexuality – would not disqualify them to sit on the nation’s highest court. Focus had been privately correcting those comments after Gary Glenn of AFA-Michigan criticized Focus’ “moral retreat” on homosexuality. Focus’ new position – first reported by AFTAH – is biblically sound because it focuses on behavior as helping to define a judge’s character. Said Focus’ Tom Minnery:

“It has been reported that we would not oppose any U.S. Supreme Court nominee over their ‘sexual orientation.’ Our Judicial Analyst [Bruce Hausknecht] made a statement to this effect in an interview with The Plum Line. To be honest, this is one of those conversations we’d like to ‘do over.’ We can assure you that we recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and does not reflect God’s created intent and desire for humanity. Further, we at Focus do affirm that character and moral rectitude should be key considerations in appointing members of the judiciary, especially in the case of the highest court in the land. Sexual behavior–be it heterosexual or homosexual–certainly lies at the heart of personal morality.”

Americans For Truth, like other pro-family groups that honor the authority of Scripture, believes that homosexuality is best understood not as an “identity” but as a behavior – one that is wrong, destructive, and unnatural. Thankfully, homosexual conduct also is changeable (1 Corinthians 6:9-11), as evinced by the countless former homosexual men and ex-lesbians living happy lives.

Supposed “gay” identity is a modern construct that undermines moral truth and people’s responsibility for their own conduct. Men and women (proudly) practicing homosexuality often are driven to justify their errant lifestyle. Even those practicing homosexuality in secret often work to promote its acceptance.

This is why people practicing homosexuality often make bad judges: even if they don’t admit it, due to their sexual self-interest, they will have a hard time fairly adjudicating cases involving homosexuality. If a judge personally views opponents of homosexuality as bigots, haters, or “homophobes” – the former terms falsely equate the outworking of faith with prejudice and malice; the latter cynically equates morality with irrational fear – will he or she be able to deal with them justly? Will homosexual judges be diligent in protecting Americans’ constitutional religious liberties – i.e., to disagree with homosexuality? Or will they – like lesbian law professor and newly-appointed EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum – decide that, in most cases, “gay rights” considerations should supersede the freedom of people to act based on their moral opposition to homosexuality?

Homosexuality is not special and it should be treated like any other sexual sin. Homosexuality (like gender confusion) does not deserve “civil rights” status. Judicial nominees who practice it – or worse, practice it proudly – have a mark against their character that absolutely should be considered as a potential source of bias, and even anti-religious animus, in their future rulings.

New EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldlum

By Laurie Higgins, reprinted with permission from Illinois Family Institute, March 30, 2010

Click HERE to watch some video clips of Chai Feldblum at a 2008 panel discussion at the Family Research Council.

______________________________

Georgetown University lesbian law professor Chai Feldblum believes that when same-sex is marriage is legalized, which she argues is both necessary and inevitable, conservative people of faith will lose religious rights. She is also one of the authors of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would provide special protections for those who choose to base their identity on their same-sex attraction or their disordered desire to do the impossible: change their sex.

And this is the same Chai Feldblum whom President Barack Obama has appointed to serve on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). He used the legal but divisive mechanism of recess appointments, which allow him to appoint people to serve in important government roles without being confirmed by the U.S. Senate. According to the homosexual newspaper, Windy City Times, “Feldblum, as part of the commission, will have considerable influence in the writing of federal regulations to enforce” the deeply troubling ENDA if it’s passed.

Feldblum, speaking at a Becket Fund Symposium in December 2005 stated the following:

[L]et us postulate, for the moment, that in some number of years an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions in this country will have changed their laws so that LGBT people will have full equality in society, including access to civil marriage. Or, indeed, let us postulate that the entire country is governed – as a matter of federal statutory and constitutional law – on the basis of full equality for LGBT people….

Assume for the moment that these beliefs ultimately translate into the passage of laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and that provide same-sex couples the same societal supports currently available to opposite-sex couples, including access to civil marriage. . . . [G]ranting this justified liberty and equality to gay people will likely put a burden on those religious people who believe acting on one’s same-sex sexual orientation is a sin and who may feel they are aiding and abetting sin if they rent an apartment to a gay couple, allow a gay couple to eat at their restaurant, or provide health benefits to a same-sex spouse….

Let me be very clear…in almost all the situations…I believe the burden on religious people that will be caused by granting gay people full equality will be justified….

That is because I believe granting liberty to gay people advances a compelling government interest, that such an interest cannot be adequately advanced if “pockets of resistance” to a societal statement of equality are permitted to flourish, and hence that a law that permits no individual exceptions based on religious beliefs will be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of liberty for gay people….

Not surprisingly, following her nomination to the EEOC, Feldblum requested that her name be removed from the subversive document she signed in 2006 entitled “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families and Relationships,” which begins with this troubling statement (emphasis in original document):

We, the undersigned – lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) and allied activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers — seek to offer friends and colleagues everywhere a new vision for securing governmental and private institutional recognition of diverse kinds of partnerships, households, kinship relationships and families. In so doing, we hope to move beyond the narrow confines of marriage politics as they exist in the United States today.

We seek access to a flexible set of economic benefits and options regardless of sexual orientation, race, gender/gender identity, class, or citizenship status.

The “Beyond Marriage” authors seek to have “Committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner” as well as “Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households” be recognized as families and accorded all the benefits of traditional marriages.

Click HERE to watch a short and important video that exposes the radical nature of Feldblum’s vision for America, American jurisprudence, and religious liberty.

And here are the titles of just three of Feldblum’s scholarly articles:

• “Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion”
• “The Right to Define One’s Own Concept of Existence: What Lawrence Can Mean for Intersex and Transgender People”
• “Gay is Good: The Moral Case for Marriage Equality and More” — in which she asserts that “even if gay couples succeed in ‘getting marriage,’ the gay rights movement may have missed a critical opportunity – a chance to make a positive moral case for gay sex and gay couples. In other words, it will have missed the opportunity to argue that ‘gay is good,’” and that “changing the public’s perception of the morality of gay sex and of changing one’s gender may ultimately be necessary to achieve true equality for LGBT people.”

If conservatives continue to self-censor, if we refuse to courageously and publicly counter the relentless, pervasive, deafening cultural messages that affirm homosexual acts as moral, we will lose speech rights, religious liberty, and we will see the destruction of marriage and the natural family.

There’s no point now in expressing your opposition to Feldblum’s appointment: Obama doesn’t care, and the Senate won’t be consulted.

Note: Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) has signed on to a pro-family coalition letter to the Senate HELP Committee expressing concern over EEOC nominee Chai Feldblum’s extreme record. Thanks to Traditional Values Coalition for taking the lead on the letter.

________________________________

Dear AFTAH Readers,

President Obama’s appointee for Commissioner to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, lesbian Georgetown University Law Professor Chai Feldblum, is backpedaling from her radical pro-homosexual/pro-polyamory positions faster than Tiger Woods from the paparazzi. The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue (in the item below from last month) is correct about the “farce” of Feldblum’s newfound “moderation” (if we could call it that).

Feldblum is a veteran law professor with decades of experience in public policy. Aren’t lawyers always warning the rest of us to “read the document before you sign”? Yet now she claims that signing her name to the 2006 radical homosexual “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage” manifesto was a “mistake,” even as she admits to being in broad agreement with its contents.

Feldblum’s feeble explanation doesn’t pass the smell test. Did she not know the meaning of “conjugal” — as in the “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage” document’s call for giving government recognition to “Households in which there is more than one conjugal partner”?

Feldblum will likely be passed out of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee today, which would send her nomination to the full Senate. (Watch her November HELP Committee testimony HERE.) We need at least one conservative senator to put a formal hold on the Feldblum nomination – because we suspect that if and when Feldblum is seated as an EEOC Commissioner, she’ll be getting her left-wing, radically “queer” groove back. –Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org.

TAKE ACTION: Call or write your U.S. Senators (202-224-3121;  www.congress.org) and especially Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) (202-224-5754) and ask them to OPPOSE Chai Feldblum’s nomination as EEOC Commissioner. Ask your Senators and especially Sen. Coburn to place a hold on her nomination so that the American people can have more time to learn of the implications of her radical sexual and anti-religious-freedom agenda. Catholic League release is after the jump….

_____________________________________

Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights press release:

Catholic League: EEOC Nominee Chai Feldblum ‘Running Scared’
11/19/2009

NEW YORK, NY (Catholic League) – Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the confirmation hearing of Georgetown law professor Chai Feldblum, nominated to join the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:

“In 2006, Feldblum signed a statement, “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage,” that was the most radical, irresponsible assault on marriage and the family ever written.

It maintained that every conceivable “partnership” and “relationship” should be on a par with marriage, and even went so far as to say that “Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households,” should be given governmental and private recognition.

In other words, gay men and lesbians who do not even live under the same roof should be able to adopt a child and then be given exactly the same kinds of governmental benefits afforded normal marital unions.

To top things off, every private institution [read: religious organizations] should be forced to do likewise.

Feldblum, however, sensing that her nomination is in trouble, announced just days ago that she wants her name taken off the anti-marriage and anti-family document.

This is a farce. She is running scared: she knew what she was signing and waited until the 11th hour to bolt. Only a fool would be fooled by this patently insincere move.”

___________________________________

The Catholic League is the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization. Founded in 1973 by the late Father Virgil C. Blum, S.J., the Catholic League defends the right of Catholics – lay and clergy alike – to participate in American public life without defamation or discrimination. It is led by its’ President, William A. Donohue, Ph.D.

ENDA Paves the Way: John Berry (left), President Obama’s openly homosexual director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, says that once the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is “enacted and signed into law, it is only a matter of time” before the rest of the administration’s sweeping homosexual and transsexual activist agenda will become law.

TAKE ACTION: write (preferably not just by e-mail) and call your U.S. Congressman and U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org) and urge them to oppose this radical big-government legislation that would strip away Americans’ foundational right to act on their religious and moral beliefs.

The following is excerpted from the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade (emphasis added):

_________________________________

ENDA should be top priority – Berry

Says ‘Don’t Ask,’ DOMA repeal should also be pursued

By CHRIS JOHNSON, Washington Blade
September 28, 2009

The highest-ranking openly gay appointee in the Obama administration is encouraging LGBT Americans to make passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act their No. 1 priority and said its success would place within reach other civil rights goals.

John Berry, director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, called for greater focus on ENDA on Saturday following his keynote address at Out for Work’s national convention at the Westin City Center Hotel in D.C.

Berry advocated for the importance of ENDA — and identified repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act as other priorities — in response to an audience member’s question about possible legislative issues on the horizon and criticism that President Obama isn’t moving quickly enough on LGBT issues.

“The most important thing we can do right now is we got to … secure the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act — and it’s got to include full transgender protections,” Berry said. “I believe that if we all concentrate our efforts where it needs to be concentrated, which is on the House of Representatives and the United States Senate, we can get the job done.”

Other pro-LGBT legislation can be more easily achieved, Berry said, if Congress were to pass ENDA.

“If we can get ENDA enacted and signed into law, it is only a matter of time before all the rest happens,” he said. “It is the keystone that holds up the whole bunch, and so we need to focus our energies and attention there.”

Berry was confident that there are enough votes in the House to pass a fully inclusive ENDA, but said a question remains over whether there are 60 votes in the Senate to end a filibuster.

“We’re very close to the 218 [votes in the House],” Berry said. “We’re within spitting distance, and I think we will get it. We are not as close on the 60 in the Senate, but we will be, and this will happen, so I think it’s going to take that focal energy point.”

The OPM director commended Obama for being “clearly on the record” in support of ENDA. …

Berry said Defense Secretary Robert Gates has “an open mind” on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but that the secretary also has to work to “balance some things,” such as military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Still, the OPM director noted that administration support alone is insufficient to overturn the law.

“This administration strongly supports the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ but in the end, having the president say that without 218 votes in the House and 60 in the Senate don’t get you far,” Berry said.

Also high among Berry’s priorities is overturning DOMA. The OPM director criticized Congress for passing the law in 1996 and said it was enacted for bad reasons.

“It was motivated only by hate, it was motivated by discrimination, it is a base law and it should be repealed,” Berry said.

Berry noted that Obama has called DOMA [discriminatory] and urged for its legislative repeal, but the OPM director added the best way toward overturning the law would be through the courts and not Congress.

“I will tell you personally I believe that I think the courts will strike this down before Congress will have to repeal it legislatively,” he said. “And thank goodness because, in this case, the backbone is not there in Congress.”

Support for repealing DOMA through litigation echoes the position of gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) on the issue. Frank has not signed on as a co-sponsor to the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would repeal DOMA, because he said Congress should tackle other LGBT priorities and a pending lawsuit against the statute better addresses the issue….

Folks, we have been slow to comment on all the Harvey Milk hype in our liberal-dominated popular culture — hype that is driving this push for an outrageous California bill that would effectively force students to celebrate a man famous for … being the first “out and proud” practitioner of homosexuality to win public office. (Oh boy: another marker for America’s Moral Meltdown.) The more one reads about Milk (see Dan Flynn’s excellent City Journal piece HERE) and the real story about his murder at the hands of Dan White (see caption above), the more preposterous becomes the idea of heralding him as a “civil rights” martyr.

For the media, Hollywood and academic establishments, the fix is in on championing Milk as an American hero. For the rest of us (the silent majority), he was a just a man with a sexual problem who achieved a political first in a city — San Francisco — that devolved into a Mecca for others with the same sexual sin problem. Had he not practiced deviant and unhealthy sex, nobody would care about the name Harvey Milk. Incidentally, this epitomizes what is wrong with “gay” history: it’s mostly written by those with a vested interest in normalizing aberrant and immoral sexual lifestyles.

And now, if Arnold wimps out, California children will learn some more skewed history. They will be taught to associate heroism, nobility and justice with a politician who not only crusaded for a misguided cause — state-enfored “rights” based on homosexuality — but who lied to advance that cause and his career. See my friend Randy Thomasson’s Save California website for more background on Milk, and information on how to urge Schwarzenegger (916-445-2841) to do the right thing by vetoing this bill. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.com

The following is excerpted from Baptist Press (emphasis added); click HERE to sign up for BP alerts.

_______________________________

‘Harvey Milk Day’ heads to Calif. gov’s desk

Baptist Press, Sep 9, 2009

By Michael Foust

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (BP)–A bill that would encourage California public schools to observe “Harvey Milk Day” and to remember the deceased homosexual leader with “commemorative exercises” passed the state Senate Tuesday and is heading to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who hasn’t taken a position on it.

Schwarzenegger actually vetoed a similar bill last year but is under more pressure this year in light of President Obama recently awarding a Presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously to Milk, the nation’s first openly homosexual person elected to public office. Milk was a San Francisco city supervisor who was assassinated in 1978 by another supervisor. The fact that the biographical movie “Milk” was released last year only adds to the pressure on the governor.

The bill (S.B. 572) would commemorate Milk with what the state calendar calls a day of “significance.” The only other such days are the Day of the Teacher (second Wednesday of May), John Muir Day (April 21) and California Poppy Day (April 6). Harvey Milk Day would be his birthday, May 22.

Schwarzenegger actually referenced the bill on his Twitter account days ago, writing, “Give me your thoughts on the water package, Harvey Milk Day, and the prison reform bill.”

It passed the Senate, 22-14, and the House, 46-28, along party-line votes with Democrats in the majority….

Individual schools and teachers could decide on their own whether to mark the day, although many certainly would. The text of the bill says “all public schools and educational institutions are encouraged to observe.” The bill says it would be appropriate to have “exercises remembering the life of Harvey Milk, recognizing his accomplishments, and familiarizing pupils with the contributions he made to this state.”

State Sen. Mark Leno, a Democrat and the bill’s sponsor, told The San Francisco Chronicle, “It should be kept in mind that he [Milk] literally gave his life so I and others can serve in public office and that every generation of LGBT Californians can pursue their every hope, dream and aspiration.”

But Randy Thomasson, an opponent of the bill and the president of SaveCalifornia.com, said Milk’s sexual escapades make him unfit to be pushed as a role model. For weeks, Thomasson’s press releases have quoted from “The Mayor of Castro Street,” a popular biography about Milk. Milk was 48 when he died but always had a desire for teen boys and men in their early 20s, the book says. He also advocated having multiple partners, it says….

Thomasson said in a [statement:] “Reputable biographies demonstrate that Milk was a sexual predator of teens, a homosexual sex addict who advocated polygamous relationships, and a public liar who justified his deceit. Harvey Milk was and is a terrible role model for kids, including kindergarteners who would be affected by this very bad bill.”

The following letter regarding the proposed Hate Crimes Prevention Act was sent by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to Senate leaders:

June 16, 2009

Re: S. 909

Dear Mr. President and Distinguished Senators:

We write today to urge you to vote against the proposed Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 909) (“MSHCPA”)

We believe that MSHCPA will do little good and a great deal of harm.  Its most important effect will be to allow federal authorities to re-prosecute a broad category of defendants who have already been acquitted by state juries—as in the Rodney King and Crown Heights cases more than a decade ago Due to the exception for prosecutions by “dual sovereigns,” such double prosecutions are technically not violations of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the U.S. Constitution  But they are very much a violation of the spirit that drove the framers of the Bill of Rights, who never dreamed that federal criminal jurisdiction would be expanded to the point where an astonishing proportion of crimes are now both state and federal offenses.  We regard the broad federalization of crime as a menace to civil liberties.  There is no better place to draw the line on that process than with a bill that purports to protect civil rights.

While the title of MSHCPA suggests that it will apply only to “hate crimes,” the actual criminal prohibitions contained in it do not require that the defendant be inspired by hatred or ill will in order to convict.  It is sufficient if he acts “because of” someone’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.  Consider:

• *Rapists are seldom indifferent to the gender of their victims.  They are virtually always chosen “because of” their gender.
• *A robber might well steal only from women or the disabled because, in general, they are less able to defend themselves.  Literally, they are chosen “because of” their gender or disability.

While Senator Edward Kennedy has written that it was not his intention to cover all rape with MSHCPA, some DOJ officials have declined to disclaim such coverage.  Moreover, both the objective meaning of the language and considerable legal scholarship would certainly include such coverage.  If all rape and many other crimes that do not rise to the level of a “hate crime” in the minds of ordinary Americans are covered by MSHCPA, then prosecutors will have “two bites at the apple” for a very large number of crimes.

DOJ officials have argued that MSHCPA is needed because state procedures sometimes make it difficult to obtain convictions.  They have cited a Texas case from over a decade ago involving an attack on a black man by three white hoodlums.  Texas law required the three defendants to be tried separately.  By prosecuting them under federal law, however, they could have been tried together.  As a result, admissions made by one could be introduced into evidence at the trial of all three without falling foul of the hearsay rule.

Such an argument should send up red flags.  It is just an end-run around state procedures designed to ensure a fair trial.  The citizens of Texas evidently thought that separate trials were necessary to ensure that innocent men and women are not punished.  No one was claiming that Texas applies this rule only when the victim is black or female or gay.  And surely no one is arguing that Texans are soft on crime.  Why interfere with their judgment?

We are unimpressed with the arguments in favor of MSHCPA and would be happy to discuss the matter further with you if you so desire.  Please do not hesitate to contact any of us with your questions or comments.

[Addressed to:]

The Honorable Joseph Biden, Jr., President, U.S. Senate
The Honorable Robert C. Byrd, President Pro Tempore, U.S. Senate
The Honorable Harry Reid, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate
The Honorable Mitch McConnell, Minority Leader, U.S. Senate
The Honorable Richard Durbin, Majority Whip, U.S. Senate
The Honorable Jon Kyl, Minority Whip, U.S. Senate
The Honorable Patrick Leahy, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee
The Honorable Jeff Sessions, Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
The Honorable Russell Feingold, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution
The Honorable Tom Coburn, Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution

______________________________________

Does a Republican Precinct Committeeman have to support all GOP candidates?

By John Biver, Editor of Champion News; posted4-27-09

Last week a good friend who is newly involved in his township GOP organization asked me if I thought he was obligated to work for Republican candidates he felt he couldn’t support. As an example, he said he can’t support Republican Congresswoman Judy Biggert because of her co-sponsoring of Republican Mark Kirk’s dangerous and wrong-headed H.R. 1913 [the "Thought Crimes" bill].

It’s a good question, since there seems to be some misunderstanding about the role of precinct committeemen, the party itself, and the people it elects.

Many Republicans hold the view that we owe a blind fealty to those who appear on our party’s ballot line. I disagree. The party is the servant to the principles, nothing more. The party has no purpose outside of that service.

Those principles are outlined nicely in the state and national platforms. Simply stated, those principles are: limited government, traditional values, and a strong national defense policy.

It has long been the position of those of us at Champion News that there are some actions taken by our GOP candidates and elected officials that disqualify them from the support of platform supporting Republicans.

The evidence is abundant that our party’s problem isn’t the Democrats – it’s liberal or incompetent “Republicans” that misuse the GOP brand. Often, it’s better to have a lousy Republican candidate lose and a Democrat win. Why? Republicans are the only people who can do lasting damage to the public’s perception of the Grand Old Party. Democrats can’t.

Click here to read the rest of the article on Champion News: http://www.championnews.net/article.php?sid=1841

“What makes Earl different from others?” Earl Rynerson asks on his campaign website. Well, for one, he’s sure to be the only candidate for mayor of Ft. Lauderdale whose credit card records show a connection to the International Masters Association, an organization created because “there was no one place where a Master or a slave could go and learn from the other members of his community.” Rynerson needs God to change him before he tries to change Ft. Lauderdale. Photo from YouTube.

OK, can we all agree that its fair to call a man with ties to a sadomasochistic “master-slave” group a “pervert,” or has that word been banished by the Gay Thought Police (GTP)? Good, then at the risk of offending the accomplished whiners at GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), here are some excerpts from a FOX News story about Earl Rynerson, one of two homosexual men running to succeed pro-family hero Jim Naugle as mayor of Ft. Lauderdale.

Now that homosexuality is “out of the closet” in such a big way, think about how much of their related perversions are also out in the open. Deviance begets deviance, and it’s all about the behavior (as opposed to that strategic euphemism: “orientation”). Note Rynerson’s lack of shame below. — Peter LaBarbera
__________________________________

From the FOXNews.com report:

Gay Candidate for Fort Lauderdale Mayor Has Curious Legal History

Earl Rynerson is an openly gay businessman with a history of curious legal problems and an apparent penchant for bondage pornography. And he thinks he’s just the man to be your mayor. …

Drawing more eyes is his apparent predilection for porn and his membership in an anonymous sex site. While not illegal, they are possible dark spots on the resume of man who is running a campaign to “polish up the city” of Fort Lauderdale.

Rynerson’s credit card bill included at least 3 monthly payments to “Access 4M4M site,” the billing name of a “men for men” sex site based in New York. “The m4m4sex website is for men looking to meet other men for sex,” the Web site declares in plain English.

Another charge on his card provides a phone number for the International Masters Association, which “unites the Leather community online and [brings] Masters and slaves together,” providing services for people “interested in Leather, Gear, Bondage, Rubber, Watersports [a fetish involving urination] and other fetishes.”

Rynerson said the stories of his credit card purchases were greatly exaggerated, and compared the Web sites to YouTube and MySpace. “These are online services that a lot of people use,” he told the Sun-Sentinel. “There’s nothing pornographic … nothing to that.”

He neither confirmed nor denied that he used the sites, saying it was an issue of privacy. “Whether or not I subscribe or don’t subscribe to racy Web sites I think it’s a personal issue,” he told the newspaper. “An individual’s private life and personal life should be kept private and personal.” …

It’s a big move in a city with a relatively weak mayor, but Rynerson originally entered the race because of comments made by incumbent mayor Jim Naugle, who angered gay Floridians with his opposition to gay marriage and controversial 2007 call to “reduce homosexual sex in bathrooms.”

A city with a large gay population — and one that benefits greatly from gay tourism — Fort Lauderdale might have voted the 6-term mayor out of office even if term limits had not been imposed on him.

Rynerson isn’t the only candidate who was stirred by Naugle’s comments to run for office. Dean Trantalis, a former city commissioner and local gay activist, has also thrown his hat in the ring.

Click here for the full FOXNews.com story: “Gay Candidate for Fort Lauderdale Mayor Has Curious Legal History”

DATE: January 21, 2009, FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Lynchburg, VA – Literally within minutes after President Obama took the oath of office yesterday, the official White House webpage was updated – under the heading of “The Agenda: Civil Rights” – to detail Obama’s wholesale “support for the LGBT (homosexual activist) community.”  His stated plans include the following:

• Defeating all state and federal constitutional efforts to defend the millennia-old definition of natural marriage;
• Repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton – the only line of defense keeping all 50 states from being forced to recognize so-called “same-sex marriages” from extremely liberal states like Massachusetts and Connecticut;
• Repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy;
• Passing constitutionally dubious and discriminatory “hate crimes” legislation, granting homosexuals and cross dressers special rights – denied other Americans – based on changeable sexual behaviors;
• Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would force business owners (religious and otherwise) to abandon traditional values relative to sexual morality under penalty of law; and,
• Creating intentionally motherless and fatherless homes and sexually confusing untold thousands of children by expanding “gay adoption.”

Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Alliance Action and Liberty Counsel [and a Board Member of Americans For Truth about Homosexuality (AFTAH)] released the following statement today in response to Obama’s stated pro-homosexual agenda:

“Well, the high-sheen veneer and ‘cult of personality’ euphoria surrounding Barack Obama looks to be dissolving rather quickly.  While millions had hoped for a political ‘messiah,’ it’s rapidly becoming evident that, instead, we’ve stuck ourselves with an extreme leftist ideologue whose brand of ‘change we can believe in’ is, in reality, ‘change we never imagined.’

“For all the talk of ‘hope,’ ‘change’ and ‘coming together,’ it’s becoming abundantly clear that Barack Obama’s administration will likely be the most leftist, divisive and discriminatory in recent memory.  I suspect the immediate, stark and ‘in your face’ changes made to the White House website are a metaphor for what we can expect, in terms of policy, from his administration.

“The gravity of this situation cannot be overstated.  Right out of the shoot, Obama has told the world that he is signing off, without exception, on every demand of the extremist homosexual and transsexual lobbies.  The radical homosexual agenda and religious and free speech liberties cannot occupy the same space.  It’s a zero-sum game.  When 1 – 2 percent of the population is granted special rights based on deviant sexual proclivities and changeable sexual behaviors, to the detriment of everyone else, that’s called tyranny of the minority.  People of faith and those of you with traditional values: hold on to your hats – it’s going to be a bumpy four years,” concluded Barber.

Click on cartoon to enlarge. Reference articles: “Schwarzenegger tells backers of gay marriage: Don’t give up” (LA Times, 11-10-08); “Schwarzenegger says gay marriage could be good for economy” (Sacramento Bee, 5-21-2008); “Schwarzenegger will battle gay marriage ban” (NY Daily News, Associated Press, 4-11-08); “Governor backs same-sex marriage ruling” (San Francisco Chronicle, 5-17-08).

_________________________________

By Peter LaBarbera

Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern (R) won re-election in a landslide, 58-42 percent, last week – overcoming a national smear campaign against her by homosexual militants and celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres who tried to paint her as an extremist – based on a secretly recorded speech in which she labeled “gay” activism a grave threat to America.

In another triumph over homosexual activism in red state Oklahoma, Kern’s close ally, Republican Dana Murphy, defeated open homosexual Jim Roth (D) for Corporate Commission – an important statewide office. Roth, the incumbent, heavily outspent Murphy, and was endorsed by the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund (GLVF) – which launched the demonization campaign against Kern and which encouraged out-of-state “gay” campaign donations to Roth.

In this heavily-watched race, GLVF hoped that Roth – already the first admitted homosexual to hold statewide office — would become the first such candidate to be elected statewide in Oklahoma. Instead, GLVF itself became a campaign issue that helped bring Roth down.

Kern – who gained much sympathy in Oklahoma because her Christian demeanor did not match the vicious caricature of her by “gay” propagandists — was honorary chairman of Mothers Organized for a Moral Society (MOMS), a 527 group created to help Murphy. Oklahoma conservatives made an issue of Roth’s pro-homosexual activism and outside “gay” financial support.

“My race and Dana Murphy’s race show that Oklahoma is one of the most conservative states the nation – and we still believe strongly in the Judeo-Christian ethic,” Rep. Kern told Americans For Truth. “We will take a stand up for what we believe in – in spite of the attacks by liberal elites and the attempt by pro-homosexual special interest groups to use out-of-state money to influence the vote in our state.”

Kern told AFTAH that ironically, the massive web-fueled homosexual activist campaign targeting her actually elevated the homosexual agenda as an election issue in Oklahoma. MOMS sent out a mailer informing voters statewide of Roth’s endorsement by the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, and that out-of-state homosexual donors were helping to finance the incumbent Democrat’s campaign.

Dana Murphy ousted heavily favored “gay” activist incumbent Democrat Jim Roth for Corporation Commission.

Roth received the major establishment endorsements in Oklahoma and outspent Murphy by at least two to one, according to Kern. But he lost 52-48, garnering 674,695 votes to Murphy’s 738,397.

As for her own victory, Kern’s margin was down from four years ago, but she told AFTAH that this was due in part to a physical ailment that greatly hindered her ability to campaign. Kern did not go door-to-door and said she did not campaign nearly as energetically as she normally would.

It is hard to overstate the animosity and vitriol that Kern faced after the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund posted online selectively edited portions of a speech she gave to a conservative group in Oklahoma. Lesbian talk show host Ellen DeGeneres even phoned Kern on air in a stunt to paint her as extreme. Kern never backed down despite receiving tens of thousands of hostile e-mails from pro-homosexual activists and some very ugly attacks against her family (including her husband Steve, who pastors a church in Oklahoma City). St. Rep. Kern benefited from a huge “Rally for Sally” at the state capitol that dwarfed a previous, small homosexual event against her in the same building.

Kern’s opponent, Ron Marlett, attempted to exploit the national homosexual vilification campaign against her by accusing Kern of being “obsessed” with the homosexual issue. It didn’t work.

Watching Kern face the withering assault from “gay” critics and the media with the grace and humility of a seasoned Christian led some supporters to begin talking up Kern as a future gubernatorial candidate for the GOP.

By Peter LaBarbera

OK, now it’s official. In three presidential debates to help us decide which man – John McCain or Barack Obama – will lead this nation, the critical issue of homosexual “marriage” didn’t even come up.

Add to that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal “hate crimes” bill and Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), homosexuality in the military, how “gay rights” laws threaten religious and other freedoms, and homosexual adoption of children.

On each of these issues, Obama and McCain strongly disagree, but we never (or barely) got to hear them explain their positions on the same stage – in contrast to Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church debate where at least “gay marriage” was discussed. The only time that homosexuality was raised in the four official debates, including the vice-presidential debate, was when moderator Gwen Ifill asked a poorly constructed question about same-sex benefits and then “gay marriage” to Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Joe Biden.

The issue of judicial appointments did come up but certainly has received far less attention than it deserves since judges are setting now policy in this country.

Do you feel as gypped as I do by the combination of media bias, campaign jingoism and political correctness that resulted in one of the most important issues facing our nation — whether marriage should be radically redefined to accommodate “rights” based on homosexual behavior – not even being mentioned in the official debates?

There are millions of voters representing both sides of this issue who would have loved to hear Sens. Obama and McCain go head-to-head on “same-sex marriage,” DOMA, etc. — just as we were relieved last night to finally hear the candidates debate a clear question about abortion and Roe vs. Wade from moderator Bob Schieffer (of CBS’ Face the Nation).

Too often reporters cynically treat abortion and homosexuality as mere “wedge issues” manipulated by politicians, thus echoing a central canard of the Libertine Left (and liberal Republicans). There may be some of that going on, but the social issues – like all issues – only have the potential to become game-breakers because so many Americans care about them.

But to many jaded members of the Fourth Estate, the Culture Wars are like a sport, disconnected from truth (what’s that?) and the driving idealism of pro-life, pro-family advocates. Many reporters can barely hide their contempt for the “religious right” (as they disparagingly call us) and don’t view homosexuality as much of an issue anymore. The media increasingly regard even “same-sex marriage” as a matter of declining importance except for its lingering political potential — per the talking heads’ insistence ad nauseam that homosexual “marriage” will not be a decisive issue in this election. (We’ll see if they are right on November 5th.)

Journalists are notoriously secular and ignorant about religion, so many don’t even try to understand the deep motivations of those who oppose homosexual practice as immoral or who fight for pro-life laws to help save innocent unborn babies. Instead, we are told that such  “wedge issues” are raised in a campaign mainly as a vehicle to help the Republican Party – ignoring the growing dissatisfaction of many pro-family advocates with the GOP’s weak advocacy on these issues.

I’ve talked to many reporters over the years who repeat the shibboleth that Culture War issues like abortion and homosexuality are trivial when compared to those that “really matter” – you know, the economy, the environment, health care, etc. But such value judgments are beyond the media’s “pay grade,” to quote Obama. In a fairer journalistic world we would not be subjected to reporters’ condescension and elitism merely because we defend traditional morality and the dictates of our faith in the public square — especially in the crucible of an election.

All we in the pro-family movement ask of reporters, editors and producers is impartiality and equal time with the Social Left to explain our cause. But apparently that is asking too much of the media, who look to dubious professional groups like the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association for guidance on how to cover homosexual issues.

Then there is the radical activist group GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination) – which has even greater media clout – and which regularly equates Judeo-Christian, pro-family opposition to homosexual practice with “hate” and “prejudice.” GLAAD pressures news outfits not to cover homosexuality’s many downsides (e.g., gay bathhouses and homosexual health risks), and tries to silence and discredit the voices of ex-“gay” men and women who left homosexuality behind.

GLAAD’s intimidation strategy works: Have you noticed how even most conservative opinion-makers like FOX’s Sean Hannity have avoided or downplayed the “same-sex marriage” issue and other aspects of the homosexual agenda this year, even though marriage amendments are on the ballots in three states — California, Florida and Arizona — and homosexual organizations are ramping up their lobbying on Capitol Hill to end the military’s homosexuality ban?

Why are conservatives cooperating with the Left and the media in taking homosexual-agenda issues off the table?

Lemming candidates?
But what about the candidates’ role in neglecting moral issues?  Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain issued statements on the recent Connecticut Supreme Court decision imposing same-sex “marriage” on that state – even though the candidates have very different positions on DOMA and whether government should sanction homosexual relationships. Why the silence? Each has his own reason, which we at AFTAH cannot discuss until the day after the election.

Ronald Reagan was different. He talked above the media and excelled at getting out his conservative, pro-family message directly to the American public even though he was derided by smug reporters as a “B actor” with a penchant for dangerous rhetoric (that Evil Empire stuff). A media-approved candidate never could have defeated Communism; Reagan did – but not by sucking up to the boys on the bus! And he succeeded back in the ‘80s when the Big Three news networks still ruled the airwaves. Now, 20 years post-Gipper, a candidate who takes bold, principled stands can still get his message out by clearly and passionately articulating his beliefs — and using the power of the burgeoning New Media to get around the biased press.

But being namby-pamby or disingenuous on issues of profound moral truth will get you nowhere fast.

The sad reality is that in our dumbed-down, secularized society, homosexuality has become the “third rail” of American politics. Being against homosexuality today is much more political incorrect than being pro-life. Just look at America’s young people, who are more pro-life and yet more pro-“gay” at the same time. The remedy is for each of us to “man up” by committing to defend moral absolutes in the culture — to heck with charges of “intolerance”! (At this point I must point out that many pro-family women like Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness have put men to shame in their willingness to stand up for morality in the culture – shame on us men.)

Perhaps some of the blame we routinely assign to the liberal media for ignoring social issues like life and marriage is more appropriately directed at gutless politicians who lack the conviction and fortitude to defend moral truth given by our Creator — in a culture that increasingly dismisses both.

Peter LaBarbera is founder and president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality (www.aftah.org). He can be reached at americansfortruth@comcast.net.

SLAVERY IS BACK — IN “PROGRESSIVE” SAN FRANCISCO (click on photos, twice, to enlarge). The “partners” in an African-American “master-slave relationship” mug for the camera (genitalia is covered up) outside the Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco Sept. 28, 2008. Note the leash and collar allowing the hand-cuffed “slave” to be led around like a dog. And the homosexual lobby and its leftist enablers call this return to (consensual) slavery “progressive”? (The second-largest homosexual organization, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force — which has given large amounts of money to defeat the Prop 8 amendment to restore traditional marriage in California — gives out a “Leather Leadership Award” at its “Creating Change” conferences.)

Note that this public nudity occurred outside the police-protected boundaries of Folsom (see metal fence in background, blocking the street at an entrance point). San Francisco police — hence law and order — are totally compromised in this “queer” Mecca, where outlandish behaviors and various human degradations — including men urinating on and in one another — are celebrated as mere “orientations.” Apparently it’s no big deal in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D) congressional district to see men strutting around the city completely naked — and Pelosi won’t denounce it (or help to stop it) for fear of alienating her powerful homosexual constituency. We were told that there are other public events in San Francisco that “tolerate” full nudity — but Folsom alone joins that with its pornographic promotion of homosexual sex clubs and depraved, promiscuous behaviors (e.g., orgiastic “pig sex”), which constitute a public health hazard and help spread disease worldwide.

Folks, this year we thought it would be beneficial for other pro-family leaders and advocates to join Americans For Truth in venturing to the world’s most famous “queer” Mecca, San Francisco, to observe the incredible goings-on at the annual “Folsom Street Fair.” Folsom is a sadomasochistic street celebration occupying 13 blocks — featuring rampant full public nudity and public whippings — all countenanced by city officials and the SFPD, which also recruits at the “fair.” Like last year, we witnessed sex acts on the streets, but a Folsom spokesman assured us that they are cracking down on that. Folsom is also the third largest outdoor event in California — drawing homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual people who are into various sexual “fetishes,” such as the “master-slave” duo above.

This was also the first year that we worked with other pro-family advocates to protest Folsom: the St. Joseph’s Men Society fielded a few men with our sign across the street from one of the busy entrance points to the “fair.” (See photo at right; St. Joseph’s president Anthony Gonzalez is holding the “Vote YES on Prop 8 sign in his right hand while talking to a reporter.) Thanks to all who helped out at the protest and our coalition press conference — where we were shouted down by intolerant homosexual militants as police stood passively by.

As we’ve said many times, we find it newsworthy that this and another extreme “leather” event occur annually in the district of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D), who is third in line to President of the United States. Over and over we were told by San Franciscans (leather advocates and otherwise) that Folsom is just part of what makes this a uniquely tolerant and quirky city — and if we didn’t like it, why don’t we just stay away? The answer is that we want people across the USA and the world to understand what “tolerance” has become in this Democratic-led city — and where that “gay agenda” that homosexual activists keep telling us doesn’t exist ultimately leads. Here is our friend Diane Gramley’s account of what we witnessed. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

_________________________________

Is This Headed for a Town Near You?

By Diane Gramley, American Family Association of Pennsylvania

WARNING:   Adult content

How does one put into words what I witnessed on Sunday, September 28th in San Francisco?  How does one explain men walking down city streets totally nude, bare-breasted and bare-bottomed women, public whippings and sex acts?  San Francisco’s Folsom Street Fair was just as depraved as reports I’d read of past ‘fairs.’ Why would a city allow this to happen? We are told it’s ‘tolerance’ that requires them to turn a blind eye to such depravity. Although they do not call it depravity, they call it being ‘progressive.’  What new acts will ‘tolerance’ allow in the future?

Before we even entered the barricaded-off 13-block area we began encountering nude men.  It was somewhat refreshing to see two young men trying to escape the assault on their senses.  As they tried to slip down an alleyway to get away from the Folsom Street Fair area, they encountered a nude man who had just walked passed a San Francisco Police Department mobile command unit and returned to his van parked in the alleyway outside the fair.  One of the guys said, “Another nude dude.  Let’s get out of here.  We don’t need to be assaulted like this.”  At the ‘charity whipping’ site, I also heard comments such as: “This is wrong.”  “This just isn’t right.”  Not everyone agrees with all that goes on at the Folsom Street Fair.

There were many youth at the fair, but also men and women ‘who were old enough to know better.’ We saw some children and a lot of people with their dogs, even though there was a warning against bringing children or pets because of the adult-oriented themes. I wondered why the organizers equated children and pets. There was also a sign at the main entrances which said “Nudity is Illegal.”  Naked individuals walked right by, apparently without noticing the signs.  The San Francisco police stood by and did nothing. One 29-year-veteran of the force said during an interview that they were told to ignore what was going on.  “You don’t know the political climate,” he told us.

As Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth, Linda Harvey of Mission America and I snapped pictures and video footage, we approached the ‘Pan’s Devils’ Horns’ booth. That’s where trouble began as some asked Peter if he was with the religious right. Peter answered, “Well, I’m not from the left.”  At that point one man began following us shouting and pointing “This is the religious right. They’ve come to take our civil rights away. They are taking pictures. They want to shut down Folsom Street Fair. They want to ban same-sex marriage.” He followed us for several blocks shouting and pointing, others were beginning to look our direction.  At one point he shoved Peter and Peter told him not to do that again or he’d call the police. We left the fair at the first exit we came to, then re-entered at another location to once again document the depravity. A side note here:  there were a lot of ‘normal looking people’ taking pictures.

Many heterosexual couples, both married and unmarried, attended Folsom Street Fair. There were many ‘gay couples,’ across the spectrum in age.  We were told that many bisexuals were there. Ironically, HIV prevention booths abounded – I guess they haven’t read Centers for Disease Control reports which point to men who have sex with men as the category with the largest number of HIV/AIDS cases.  The CDC has also said that bisexuals are the bridge for AIDS into the heterosexual community.

Additional booths included the San Francisco Public Health Department (two large penises were outside the booth and young women were lining up to have their pictures taken with them), there was a booth where one could get free Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B shots, the San Francisco Chronicle and New York Times had booths, PFLAG (Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbian and Gays) was also there.  Peter was able to get a picture of two naked men in front of the PFLAG booth. The San Francisco Police Department also had a recruiting booth right in the middle of all this illegal activity. There was a booth where religious sex toys were for sale.  Some of these were named God’s Rod, Jesus’ Baby Butt Plug and Jesus on the Cross.

I also noticed several “No on Prop 8” stickers being worn including by the attendant of the PFLAG booth.  Our detractors said there was no way we could connect the opponents of Prop 8 to Folsom Street Fair – I think they made the case for us.  Many Obama shirts and stickers were seen throughout the ‘fair.’

Booze flowed freely and the smell of dope was everywhere.

For about the last hour Peter interviewed Susan Wright, the founder of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF) and the spokesperson for Folsom Street Fair. Linda and I both taped the interview.  Susan made the claim that for those involved in BDSM (Bondage, Discipline, Sadism, Masochism) it was their sexual orientation. In the future NCSF will work on getting BDSM added to sexual orientation laws.  (proof that the addition of sexual orientation to laws opens the door to special rights for those involved in more and more bizarre lifestyle choices)  She said that any sexual activity should be allowable between consenting adults. [Editor's note: Wright said that includes people who like to be urinated on and other revolting and unhealthy practices as part of their "consexual" sexual activity.--LaBarbera] Ms. Wright did not believe that those under 18 are able to consent and did not support efforts to lower age of consent laws.  She opposes child pornography, but other forms of pornography and obscenity are okay. Proposition 8 – the Marriage Protection Amendment — is strongly opposed by her.

How quickly America has fallen into this pit.  Susan Wright views today’s BDSM movement as where the so-called gay rights movement was twenty years ago.  [A transcript of the Wright interview is forthcoming.] She is predicting that in that time span Bondage, Discipline, Sado Masochism will become a civil right protected by law. Can you imagine the sex ed classes of that day?  School children will be taught that, if your partner consents, it is okay to urinate and defecate on him or her; it’s okay to whip or tie up your partner . . . anything goes as long as it is between consenting adults.  If a parent doesn’t want their children exposed to those ideas, tough, they are infringing on the civil rights of those engaging in BDSM.

Pray for America.

Lunchtime at Folsom.

The following is the account by Linda Harvey, my friend and the founder of the Ohio-based group Mission America, about our walk through the Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco September 28. We were joined by Diane Gramley of American Family Association of Pennsylvania, whose account we will also post. –Peter LaBarbera

_______________________________

By Linda Harvey

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT

SAN FRANCISCO, Cal., Sept. 30 — The need to pass California’s Proposition 8, upholding marriage between one man and one woman, has never been greater in my view after spending an afternoon at the San Francisco Folsom Street Fair on September 28.With well over 100,000 attendees, it’s unfortunately the third largest street event in California.

Folsom Street displayed the fully ripened rotten fruit of ‘tolerance’ and showed where it takes us: toward public nudity, public sex and consensual sex violence. The goal of same sex ‘marriage’ is the legitimate-appearing sister with an ugly evil twin: the movement toward total pansexual license throughout our culture. And concern for the effect on kids? Out the window.

We observed many buttons and signs urging ‘no’ votes on Prop 8 and also many signs supporting Barack Obama. This is the kind of wise public policy we can anticipate as a Folsom Fair mentality gains legitimacy, which it clearly has in San Francisco.

Along with the heads of several other pro-family groups, I spent four excruciating hours walking through the fair, documenting its horrors. One might ask, why bother? Two reasons. Here in San Francisco, most no longer have a problem with such outlandish behavior. These radical, misguided and lost people need to be challenged out of their comfort with this depravity. Can any of them be pulled from this fire?

But local officials seem entrenched in the endorsement of depravity. Mayor Gavin Newsom issued a letter last week congratulating the Fair on its 25 year anniversary. U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, third in line for the presidency, represents San Francisco but she has yet to utter a word of criticism against the Fair, even with its history of virulent anti-Christian blasphemy.

A second concern, at least as important, is the need to warn the rest of America: sit out this dance with the homosexual agenda, and Folsom Street and its offspring will be on your doorstep, beckoning your children, within a short time. Already, some of these elements—nudity, sex acts, sado-masochism– are popping up in the growing number of street parties and ‘gay’ pride parades around the country.

The folks in San Francisco are woefully out of touch with mainstream America. Do you find whipping, being tied up (bondage) and master-slave role playing just normal variations of sexual behavior? We didn’t think so. But we had a chance to talk with the spokesperson for a national sado-masochism group, Susan Wright, who believes conservatives are few and far between, greatly eclipsed by a majority who accept these behaviors. She also thinks sado-masochism is an inborn “sexual orientation,” worthy at some point of legal recognition. In other words, some people are genetically wired to desire being whipped or chained for sexual pleasure. Current sexual orientation policies could be utilized to establish this new identity category, she believes.

What we witnessed at the Fair was almost beyond belief. Half or more of the crowd consisted of homosexual men, some fully nude. The smell of marijuana was everywhere. Masters and their ‘slaves’ strolled about. One man and woman were wrapped in pythons. Many college age kids and young adults were present.

We witnessed at least one open sex act, and many more episodes of male-to- male groping. Several vendor areas featured sado-masochistic acts. At one, they held a ‘charity whipping.’ The Fair itself donates much of its revenue to charity, which evidently excuses the perversion. Some goes to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, the twisted men-in-drag so infamous for mocking Christianity, heterosexuality and the Catholic church. The ‘sisters’ collect the entrance fee donations at the Fair gates. When I asked for an interview, one of them declined when he learned I was with a conservative Christian group.

So at the Society of Janus whipping booth, we witnessed a girl and a guy tied up and flogged. The girl, nude from the waist up, looked like she was in real pain. There was a huge group congregated around this area. I was truly sickened in an atmosphere of palpable spiritual evil.

At other booths, blasphemous sex toys were on sale. One could purchase items named after the Father, Jesus, Mary and so on. Homosexual pornography was available everywhere. And one vendor, ‘Pan’s Devil Horns,’affixed horns onto the heads of eager fair-goers.

It was at this booth that we experienced an encounter with the truly dark side, as we were spotted and identified as Fair critics. A tall, scantily- dressed older guy pointed at Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth, and shouted, ‘It’s the religious right! They want to shut down the Fair! They’re here to take away your rights and to stop gay marriage!’ A sea of heads turned as this man followed us relentlessly for several blocks and continued to shout and point. He shoved LaBarbera, who told him to stop or he would call the police. When asked what his name was, our harasser replied, ‘Beelzebub!’ Indeed.

Another episode of overt spiritual warfare occurred after we exited the Fair to avoid our pursuer and re-entered at another gate (the Fair encompasses thirteen city blocks). We spotted a group of what appeared to be young teens laughing and dancing, apparently quite intoxicated. One boy was dressed as a girl. We approached them and asked if we could talk. One insisted he was eighteen; another said twenty. They looked more like fifteen or sixteen.

In an extended conversation with the ‘eighteen-year-old,’ I was told his parents didn’t care what he did. He held a triple X-rated ‘gay’ porn DVD evidently obtained at the Fair. Yet he was eager to talk to me, insisting he did not want to be homosexual and had tried to stop since he was eleven. I challenged him: then why are you here? Do you really want to stop? If so, don’t come to events like this. He said he just couldn’t help himself. I gently urged him to re-think his identity—that God had made him a guy, wonderfully able to have a relationship with a girl. He nodded. ‘I know,’ he said.

Just at that moment, before we could continue, the youth’s ‘boyfriend’ began screeching insults and obscenities at me. ‘You’re an *&##!’ He continued this screeching rant, growing louder and more out of control, until finally, a passer-by said, ‘Oh, leave her alone!’ We never continued the dialogue, because the group of boys disappeared into the crowd.

We spoke with police twice, after noting their consistent failure to detain any of the naked men strolling by. I asked a policeman why they didn’t do something about the nudity. He told us that his supervisors had given instructions to leave it alone. We got truly mixed signals about the legality of public nudity and public sex acts. Liberty Counsel researched California law and found that three California state laws (Sections 311.6, 313 and 314 of the California Code) applied to public indecency, with jail time of up to six months. And signs going into the Fair announced, ‘Nudity is Illegal.’ With so many openly nude men, this was almost comical.

Confusion or deception abounds. We were told by Susan Wright, our sado-masochism activist, that nudity is not illegal. One TV reporter asked why we focused solely on Folsom Street, since there’s a huge race called Bay to Breakers in San Francisco in the spring where many of the race participants, both men and women, are fully nude. So much for the rule of law in California.

In years past, young children were observed in the Folsom Fair crowd. Our group only spotted one stroller with a child this year— one too many– but there were definitely many teens.  Signs and written notices at the entrances gave heightened warnings about the attendance of children, stronger than previous years, perhaps due to criticism by pro-family groups.

Among other vendors was the San Francisco Department of Health, with two huge penises in their booth, presumably so their public health oversight could be taken seriously. AIDS education groups were also present, using taxpayer funds wisely.  Also on hand was one of my personal favorite groups, PFLAG, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays. While we will not be able to show them to you in a pro-family context, it was easy to photograph nude men posing for cameras in front of the PFLAG booth. PFLAG is a consistent advocate of homosexuality and gender change among teens and even children.

The New York Times and the San Francisco Chronicle had booths also, casting aside all pretense of objectivity.  And the San Francisco Police Department had a recruiting booth, so apparently the blind can continue to lead the blind.  I wonder: were nude men welcome to fill out applications?

By 6 pm, the vendors were closing down, intoxicated and high attendees were staggering away, and trash was blowing everywhere. We were wrapping up an extended interview LaBarbera had with Susan Wright. It was surreal, talking with an apparently coherent official spokesperson for this depravity. She firmly believes that children should not be exposed to this, that there are ethics about sexual experimentation and sado-masochism, that all these radical behaviors can be ‘managed’ carefully. I felt like shouting at her: look around you. This dark and depressing climate is the predictable result of ‘progressive’ ideas.

This de-humanization is actually regressive. There’s nothing new here: it’s primitive tribalism and the sins of the Old Testament pagan nations reincarnated, spiraling downward into barbarism. Only the sane and discerning can save California and the rest of America from its debased exports.

Christ came to save people from drowning in their own excess, but in the City by the Bay, drowning is not only apparently acceptable, it is eagerly pursued. So sad.

http://www.missionamerica.com/homosexual.php?articlenum=71

SEE Part 1, now at
http://www.missionamerica.com/homosexual.php?articlenum=72

FOR PHOTOS and MORE, go to Americans for Truth photo-story:

http://americansfortruth.com/news/nudity-is-illegal-but-nudity-was-everywhere-at-folsom-street-fair.html

Coverage by the San Francisco Chronicle:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/29/BAVP137PGV.DTL

Two previous AFTAH photo-stories exposing San Francisco public perversion and nudity:

• 2007 Folsom Street Fair: “Tolerance Gone Wild in San Francisco”
• 2008 Up Your Alley street fair: “Nudity Fills San Francisco Streets as Cops Look on and Do Nothing at ‘Up Your Alley’ Street Fair”

_________________________________
More from Mission America:

Why is America’s youth being drawn into primitive practices and weird sexuality? Find out in Linda Harvey’s new book,”NOT MY CHILD: Contemporary Paganism and the New Spirituality.” Order it HERE on ChristianBook.com.

Get your children out of the public schools NOW, or start today fighting anti-Christian, pro-homosexual teaching!

For the latest news about the homosexual agenda in our schools, go to Mission America’s companion web site,

www.truthatschool.org/news.htm

AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera says, “Mission America is one of the finest organizations in America: please help support Linda’s vital work on behalf of our children and public school students.”

Mission America
PO Box 21836
Columbus, OH 43221

www.missionamerica.com

Picture this: a group of conservatives standing on the steps of the City Hall of San Francisco, holding a news conference. Several homosexual couples, dressed to the hilt, are also present with relatives/friends in tow, posing for cameras, following their same-sex “marriages.” We, however, are holding signs supporting traditional marriage and a huge banner that says, “Stop Public Nudity and Street Orgies.”

We aren’t exactly given the keys to the city.

Reporters are present from the San Francisco Chronicle, the Examiner, and a TV station. And somehow, homosexual activists have gotten our press releases, too, because they show up with neatly printed signs: “Say No to Anti-LGBT Bigotry” and “Equality in Marriage.”

This is the scene on September 26, 2008, as Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth, Diane Gramley of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania, Anthony Gonzalez of the St. Joseph’s Men’s Society and I, along with a few other sympathizers, take a very public stand against the Folsom Street Fair and in favor of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that, if passed, will affirm traditional marriage, overturning the ruling from the CA Supreme Court in May that allows these couples to believe themselves legally married. If Prop 8 does not pass, same-sex “marriage” could become legal throughout the United States if an activist federal court backed up by the Supreme Court misapplies the Full Faith and Credit provisions of the Constitution.

As Peter LaBarbera begins the press conference with some prepared statements, five or six aggressive homosexual activists attempt to shout him down. Some chant, “Shame! Shame! Shame on you!” which continues for a half hour. Peter proceeds nonetheless. Then Michael Petrelis, an AIDS activist, steps up next to Peter and attempts to take over the platform. Declaring his rights of free speech (while attempting to deny us ours), he waves pictures and shouts incoherently about homosexual hangings in Iran.

Finally, the police come forward and urge Petrelis to allow us to continue, and he steps aside, for a time.

Peter’s message decries the upcoming Folsom Street Fair, which has received the written endorsement of Mayor Gavin Newsom. Our group also holds up an enlarged copy of the letter of congratulations to the Folsom Fair, written on the mayor’s official letterhead. Folsom Street Fair officials earlier in the week threatened LaBarbera with a lawsuit for publicizing the mayor’s endorsement. Legal counsel has determined such a suit would be baseless.

When Peter finishes, I step forward to speak. The clamor continues. My prepared remarks go out the window. I speak for several minutes about the concern I have for the children who were photographed at last year’s Fair witnessing naked men in sex acts. I discuss California’s moral pollution and child corruption. The interruptions and mockery, by this city of tolerance, continue.

Diane Gramley speaks also, followed by Anthony Gonzalez, both urging the city to re-think its embrace of immorality. Both receive the same rude treatment. I am now holding one end of the huge banner. Many people are taking pictures and taping the press conference—I am not sure who all these people are. At several points, individuals confront me and we have a discussion off to the side. One African-American “gentleman” gets closer and closer to me, shouting about how I am a bigot and hate gays, and I attempt to deny this, repeating that he did not know me and that I hate no one. Finally I ask a policeman to get this man out of my face, and the officer speaks to the man, who melts into the growing crowd.

A young bicyclist also gives me a choice finger gesture and shouts the “f” word at me over and over. He then says he hates our God. I tell him, “No, you don’t. Don’t say that.” I tell him I’ll pray that God will ignore him saying this. He shuts up. He looks like he’s either on some type of drug, or he’s about to cry, or both.

Peter LaBarbera moves to the side for an interview with a TV station, and as he does so, our AIDS activist friend takes center stage again, blocking our banner. He shouts about our bigotry and the Iran thing. So I move in front of him, blocking him and holding a “Yes on Proposition 8” sign. I am too close to him, so the policeman asks me to step a few feet in front of him, which I do. The activist steps to one side; so do I. He moves to the other side; so do I. He starts laughing and asks me if I want to dance. I give up and step aside, smiling a bit myself. Then after the police approach him again, he moves away.

Many side conversations begin at this point. Peter is engaged with four of the hecklers in a bold but peaceful debate. I talk for about 15 minutes with a young guy and gal who stop on their bikes. He was raised in a Southern Baptist church, it turns out, but has left all this behind. At first mocking, their attitude changes and it ends up becoming a witnessing opportunity. Finally, still seeing same-sex couples filing in and out of City Hall, we pack up our signs and leave.

The worst is yet to come, for in two days we will attend the Folsom Street Fair to enter the gates of hell— men engaging in sado-masochistic sex acts fully nude to the witness of thousands of people, on the Sabbath Day. I am told it resonates with a true spirit of evil. Yet we have seen the web site and the booth space allotted to the San Francisco Chronicle, the New York Times, the San Francisco Police Department and even one “Christian” church.

In LaBarbera’s conversations with the our hecklers, he tells us later that none of them had any objection to the Folsom Street Fair, not even children being present (if their parents bring them). Perhaps this doesn’t represent all the people of San Francisco. But perhaps it does.

Later, we ask each other, “In all that crowd, did anyone come up to you expressing words of support?” All our answers are the same: no.

San Francisco politicians voted to ban the sale of cigarettes in city drug stores — while they extol the Folsom Street Fair with its illegal public orgies, celebration of hyper-promiscuous homosexual “pig sex,” and promotion of disease-spreading gay sex clubs like “Blow Buddies” and Steamworks. Meanwhile, Folsom doubles as an AIDS fundraiser and the San Francisco Department of Public Health has two booths at the event — go figure. 

Below is the statement that I read at our press conference Friday, over the shouts of intolerant homosexual activists. Can you imagine if our national media reported on America’s moral decline with the urgency that it has covered the current economic crisis?–Peter LaBarbera

Statement by Peter LaBarbera, President, Americans For Truth, at press conference condemning San Francisco Folsom Street Fair, Sept. 26, 2008, San Francisco City Hall:

I want you to forget for a moment that the four people who stand before you are religious or that we represent conservative organizations diametrically opposed to the GLBT movement.  Discount that three of us come from outside the Bay area and put aside, if you can, the stereotypes that some of you have of the so-called “Religious Right.”

Now consider what we are here to expose and criticize.  Every year – in fact, twice a year now – San Francisco plays eager host to street fairs like the Folsom Street Fair this Sunday that feature the following (most of which I have personally witnessed as a critical observer):

•    Rampant public nudity including men walking the streets in nothing but their socks and sneakers;
•    Public street orgies in which men engage in heinous sex acts – as depicted on these enlarged photos [blow-ups of AFTAH web photos like those HERE and HERE] — as thousands of fairgoers walk by;
•    Public sadistic whippings, acts of “consensual” degradation including men urinating on one another – for pleasure — and “master-and-slave” partners or perverse arrangements in which one partner plays the role of an animal, led around on a dog-collar by his “master”;
•    Blatant anti-Christian bigotry – e.g., the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” — transvestite mock “nuns” who work closely with Folsom; and religious-themed “sex toys” sold by vendors;
•    Public health hazards: Folsom promotes local gay sex clubs like “Blow Buddies” and Steamworks, a Berkeley bathhouse where men go for anonymous sexual encounters with other men (including condomless, “barebacking” anal sex) that spread diseases;
•    Police blame their inaction amidst all the illegal, debauched acts on politicians who tell them not to intervene or enforce the law. At the same time, the SFPD recruits at this sordid affair [the police have a booth at Folsom again this year] — an all-time low and embarrassment for men in blue everywhere whose mission is supposed to be “law enforcement.”

As our nation deals with a severe economic crisis – in the swirl of intense media glare – America faces an equally grave moral crisis that flies under the politically correct media’s radar. In the name of “tolerance and diversity,” we are casting aside all boundaries, some dating back to the beginning of recorded time. In that sense, redefining marriage outside its natural male-female state — and  Folsom’s shocking, police-protected public perversions — are mere markers of a nation in steep decline, a nation that is leaving God behind.

It is no coincidence that the man who took it upon himself four years ago to illegally and radically redefine marriage – Mayor Gavin Newsom – now enthusiastically welcomes the Folsom Street Fair with its unbelievable public depravities – an event that makes San Francisco a subject of ridicule and opprobrium the world over.

Why is it that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi – who considers herself a faithful Catholic — refused to denounce the blatant anti-Christian bigotry of last year’s Folsom Street Fair with its artwork turning da Vinci’s “Last Supper” painting of Christ and his disciples into a sadomasochistic, fetish-celebrating farce?

And how is it that a city that ostensibly cares so much about protecting citizens’ health that it bans the sale of cigarettes in pharmacies, still allows the proliferation of sex clubs where men plop down ten bucks or so to engage in anonymous, reckless sexual encounters with complete strangers? We here today say, close down “Blow Buddies,” Steamworks and other disease-spreading gay sex clubs — and in the process help preserve the lives of homosexual men, not to mention the female spouses of men on the “down low.”

There is no excuse for any city – no matter how “tolerant” – to allow the public sex and nudity documented on these and countless other photos. The way back from anarchy is a return to enforcement of the rule of law. No special interest group – including homosexuals – deserves the “special right” to redefine nature and marriage itself and put its wants above the law.