Americans For Truth » Pending Legislation

The Obama-Care Health Bill’s Stealth Homosexual Agenda

Peterlab — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:56:23 +0000

Already the homosexual activists are boasting that Obama-care is advancing their agenda. As sure as the push for “gay marriage” follows homosexual special rights laws, federal socialized “health care” will lead ultimately to taxpayers funding transsexual “sex-reassignment surgeries” (read: gender-confused body mutilations).

And once again, we see evidence of how the Homosexual and Abortion Lobbies work hand in hand, with the nation’s largest homosexual pressure group (Human Rights Campaign) fighting the pro-life Stupak-Pitts amendment. One would think that homosexuals — with seemingly no interest in normal sex and its consequences — would not have much interest in the abortion issue. But here they are crusading for a bill change that will result in federal subsidies for abortion under the rubric of “health care” and “fairness.” (HRC President Joe Solmonese was once a senior staffer at the pro-abortion pac EMILY’s LIST.)

Click HERE for a copy of the Senate health care bill, HR 3590, and HERE for a Table of Contents page — with actual page numbers! — for the same bill, that was written by a Texas citizen. (Apparently Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) didn’t have time to put one in as he rushed the monstrous bill to the floor.) A vote on cloture for the Senate bill is planned for tomorrow, Saturday.) Click here for an excellent Family Research Council alert on Saturday’s cloture vote. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

From the Coral Ridge Ministries’ website:

WASHINGTON, D.C. Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009 — As the Senate works behind closed doors to combine the newly passed House health care takeover bill with two Senate versions that have already passed separate committees, special interest groups are rallying their members to lobby for favored provisions. The House bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (3962), passed on Nov. 7 by a vote of 220 to 215. The Senate’s timetable is unclear, with Majority Leader Harry Reid pledging to complete a bill before Christmas, but many observers say that this is unlikely because of the sheer immensity of the proposal and the growing opposition.

Among the biggest winners in the House version were homosexual activists. According to the Human Rights Campaign, the largest “gay” pressure group, the House bill contains several key elements that “have been part of HRC’s legislative agenda as free-standing bills for many years,” says the group’s Website, which boasts that HRC lobbied hard to have them included. The only negative aspect in HRC’s eyes is the Stupak-Pitts amendment barring federal funding for abortions, which passed 240 to 194. HRC pledges to “work with our pro-choice coalition allies to help see that it is removed or revised as health care reform moves forward.” That’s a good bet, since President Obama promised Planned Parenthood that abortion subsidies would be part of health care reform.

Key pro-homosexual provisions highlighted by HRC include:

Special treatment: A section designating “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as special categories would open up “health data collection and grant programs focused on health disparities related to sexual orientation and gender identity.” The “gay” lobby, which has been promoting the fiction, especially among schoolchildren, that homosexual behavior is natural and poses no health risks, admits here that the behavior involves unique health problems. Unmentioned are astronomically higher rates of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS among homosexual males, and increased rates of domestic violence, suicide, alcohol and drug abuse, and mental illness among both sexes.
Domestic partner tax benefits: HR 3296 incorporates the language of the proposed Tax Equity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act, which would apply marital-type tax advantages to same-sex couples. Currently, employer-provided health insurance costs for a married couple are excluded from gross taxable income. This is a way that companies and the tax code historically have supported marriage, which is regarded as a key factor in attracting the most stable, loyal employees. Under the bill, employees who have domestic partners would be treated the same as those with spouses.
More HIV funding for the states: The bill incorporates the Early Treatment for HIV Act, which, according to HRC, “would permit state Medicaid programs to provide HIV treatment to individuals before they develop AIDS. The act would amend Title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide states with the option of covering low-income, HIV-positive people as ‘categorically needy.’ States taking advantage of this option would be provided with an enhanced federal Medicaid match.” This is the only provision that might make some sense—getting aid to people before they develop full-blown AIDS. But it needs more examination in light of its impact on Medicaid, etc.
Pro-homosexual, comprehensive sex education: HR 3962 provides funding for comprehensive condom-focused sex education programs, while leaving out abstinence programs, which HRC dismisses as “discriminatory” because they don’t facilitate “safe” gay sex. Given that after three decades of “comprehensive” sex ed, that homosexual males are still by far the largest category of AIDS cases and deaths and represent the lion’s share of syphilis and other STDs, the claim to be able to teach “safe” gay sex should be regarded as an oxymoron. The HRC also does not like the emphasis that abstinence programs put on delaying sex for marriage and supports programs that sexualize children at younger and younger ages.
Non-discrimination: The bill “prohibits consideration of personal characteristics unrelated to the provision of health care.” HRC sees this as elevating “sexual orientation” to a civil rights category within the health care system.

The two Senate versions so far “do not contain the important provisions for LGBT people incorporated in the House-passed bill,” HRC notes, promising to lobby for final inclusion of its list.

TAKE ACTION: Please contact your two U.S. Senators and urge them to oppose HR 3962 and the two Senate health care takeover bills, S1796 and S1679. Click here for an excellent Family Research Council alert on Saturday’s cloture vote. The Capitol switchboard is (202) 224-3121 [you can also call 202-225-3121 or write your representatives through www.congress.org].

Robert H. Knight is Senior Writer and Washington, D.C., Correspondent at Coral Ridge Ministries. He is the author of Fighting For America’s Soul (Coral Ridge Ministries, 2009).

Table of Contents of Senate Majority Leader Reid’s Health Care Bill, HR 3590

Peterlab — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:13:34 +0000

SENATE HEALTHCARE BILL — H.R. 3590

“Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”

November 18, 2009

http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act.pdf

(The version of the Senate Bill on Senator Reid’s website does not include page numbers on the Table of Contents. This document — created by a private citizen who laboriously entered the page numbers on the attached Table of Contents — was provided by Texas education advocate Donna Warner. We apologize that the Page Numbers on the right side are not flush with the right side of the page.)

TAKE ACTION: Call 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121 and click here to reach your U.S. Senators and Congressman: www.congress.org

Page #

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the

5 ‘‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’’.

6 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents of

7 this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

2

TITLE I—QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL

AMERICANS

Subtitle A—Immediate Improvements in Health Care Coverage for All 15

Americans

Sec. 1001. Amendments to the Public Health Service Act. 15

‘‘PART A—INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP MARKET REFORMS 15

‘‘SUBPART II—IMPROVING COVERAGE 16

‘‘Sec. 2711. No lifetime or annual limits 16

‘‘Sec. 2712. Prohibition on rescissions. 16

‘‘Sec. 2713. Coverage of preventive health services. 17

‘‘Sec. 2714. Extension of dependent coverage. 18

‘‘Sec. 2715. Development and utilization of uniform explanation of coverage 19

documents and standardized definitions.

‘‘Sec. 2716. Prohibition of discrimination based on salary. 26

‘‘Sec. 2717. Ensuring the quality of care. 26

‘‘Sec. 2718. Bringing down the cost of health care coverage. 30

‘‘Sec. 2719. Appeals process. 33

Sec. 1002. Health insurance consumer information. 34

Sec. 1003. Ensuring that consumers get value for their dollars. 37

Sec. 1004. Effective dates. 40

Subtitle B—Immediate Actions to Preserve and Expand Coverage 41

Sec. 1101. Immediate access to insurance for uninsured individuals with a preexisting 41

condition.

Sec. 1102. Reinsurance for early retirees. 48

Sec. 1103. Immediate information that allows consumers to identify affordable 54

coverage options.

Sec. 1104. Administrative simplification. 57

Sec. 1105. Effective Date 77

Subtitle C—Quality Health Insurance Coverage for All Americans 78

PART I—HEALTH INSURANCE MARKET REFORMS 78

Sec. 1201. Amendment to the Public Health Service Act. 78

‘‘SUBPART I—GENERAL REFORM 78

‘‘Sec. 2701. Fair health insurance premiums. 80

‘‘Sec. 2702. Guaranteed availability of coverage. 82

‘‘Sec. 2703. Guaranteed renewability of coverage. 83

‘‘Sec. 2704. Prohibition of preexisting condition exclusions or other discrimination 78

based on health status.

‘‘Sec. 2705. Prohibiting discrimination against individual participants and 83

beneficiaries based on health status.

‘‘Sec. 2706. Non-discrimination in health care. 95

‘‘Sec. 2707. Comprehensive health insurance coverage. 96

‘‘Sec. 2708. Prohibition on excessive waiting periods. 97

PART II—OTHER PROVISIONS 97

Sec. 1251. Preservation of right to maintain existing coverage. 97

3

Sec. 1252. Rating reforms must apply uniformly to all health insurance issuers 99

and group health plans.

Sec. 1253. Effective dates. 99

Subtitle D—Available Coverage Choices for All Americans 100

PART I—ESTABLISHMENT OF QUALIFIED HEALTH PLANS 100

Sec. 1301. Qualified health plan defined. 100

Sec. 1302. Essential health benefits requirements. 102

Sec. 1303. Special rules. 116

Sec. 1304. Related definitions. 124

PART II—CONSUMER CHOICES AND INSURANCE COMPETITION THROUGH 128

HEALTH BENEFIT EXCHANGES

Sec. 1311. Affordable choices of health benefit plans. 128

Sec. 1312. Consumer choice. 153

Sec. 1313. Financial integrity. 160

PART III—STATE FLEXIBILITY RELATING TO EXCHANGES 164

Sec. 1321. State flexibility in operation and enforcement of Exchanges and related 164

requirements.

Sec. 1322. Federal program to assist establishment and operation of nonprofit, 168

member-run health insurance issuers.

Sec. 1323. Community health insurance option. 182

Sec. 1324. Level playing field. 200

PART IV—STATE FLEXIBILITY TO ESTABLISH ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS 201

Sec. 1331. State flexibility to establish basic health programs for low-income individuals 201

not eligible for Medicaid.

Sec. 1332. Waiver for State innovation. 212

Sec. 1333. Provisions relating to offering of plans in more than one State. 219

PART V—REINSURANCE AND RISK ADJUSTMENT 226

Sec. 1341. Transitional reinsurance program for individual and small group 226

markets in each State.

Sec. 1342. Establishment of risk corridors for plans in individual and small 233

group markets.

Sec. 1343. Risk adjustment. 236

Subtitle E—Affordable Coverage Choices for All Americans 238

PART I—PREMIUM TAX CREDITS AND COST-SHARING REDUCTIONS 238

SUBPART A—PREMIUM TAX CREDITS AND COST-SHARING REDUCTIONS 238

Sec. 1401. Refundable tax credit providing premium assistance for coverage 238

under a qualified health plan.

Sec. 1402. Reduced cost-sharing for individuals enrolling in qualified health 259

plans.

SUBPART B—ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS 269

4

Sec. 1411. Procedures for determining eligibility for Exchange participation, 269

premium tax credits and reduced cost-sharing , and individual

responsibility exemptions.

Sec. 1412. Advance determination and payment of premium tax credits and 290

cost-sharing reductions.

Sec. 1413. Streamlining of procedures for enrollment through an exchange and 295

State Medicaid, CHIP, and health subsidy programs.

Sec. 1414. Disclosures to carry out eligibility requirements for certain programs. 302

Sec. 1415. Premium tax credit and cost-sharing reduction payments disregarded 306

for Federal and Federally-assisted programs.

PART II—SMALL BUSINESS TAX CREDIT 307

Sec. 1421. Credit for employee health insurance expenses of small businesses. 307

Subtitle F—Shared Responsibility for Health Care 320

PART I—INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY 320

Sec. 1501. Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage. 320

Sec. 1502. Reporting of health insurance coverage. 340

PART II—EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES 346

Sec. 1511. Automatic enrollment for employees of large employers. 346

Sec. 1512. Employer requirement to inform employees of coverage options. 347

Sec. 1513. Shared responsibility for employers. 348

Sec. 1514. Reporting of employer health insurance coverage. 357

Sec. 1515. Offering of Exchange-participating qualified health plans through 362

cafeteria plans.

Subtitle G—Miscellaneous Provisions 364

Sec. 1551. Definitions. 364

Sec. 1552. Transparency in government. 364

Sec. 1553. Prohibition against discrimination on assisted suicide. 364

Sec. 1554. Access to therapies. 366

Sec. 1555. Freedom not to participate in Federal health insurance programs. 367

Sec. 1556. Equity for certain eligible survivors. 367

Sec. 1557. Nondiscrimination. 368

Sec. 1558. Protections for employees. 369

Sec. 1559. Oversight. 371

Sec. 1560. Rules of construction. 371

Sec. 1561. Health information technology enrollment standards and protocols. 373

Sec. 1562. Conforming amendments. 377

TITLE II—ROLE OF PUBLIC PROGRAMS 396

Subtitle A—Improved Access to Medicaid 396

Sec. 2001. Medicaid coverage for the lowest income populations. 396

Sec. 2002. Income eligibility for nonelderly determined using modified gross income. 418

Sec. 2003. Requirement to offer premium assistance for employer-sponsored insurance. 427

Sec. 2004. Medicaid coverage for former foster care children. 428

Sec. 2005. Payments to territories. 430

5

Sec. 2006. Special adjustment to FMAP determination for certain States recovering 432

from a major disaster.

Sec. 2007. Medicaid Improvement Fund rescission. 436

Subtitle B—Enhanced Support for the Children’s Health Insurance Program 436

Sec. 2101. Additional federal financial participation for CHIP. 436

Sec. 2102. Technical corrections. 442

Subtitle C—Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment Simplification 445

Sec. 2201. Enrollment Simplification and coordination with State Health Insurance 445

Exchanges.

Sec. 2202. Permitting hospitals to make presumptive eligibility determinations 451

for all Medicaid eligible populations.

Subtitle D—Improvements to Medicaid Services 453

Sec. 2301. Coverage for freestanding birth center services. 453

Sec. 2302. Concurrent care for children. 456

Sec. 2303. State eligibility option for family planning services. 457

Sec. 2304. Clarification of definition of medical assistance. 466

Subtitle E—New Options for States to Provide Long-Term Services and

Supports 466

Sec. 2401. Community First Choice Option. 466

Sec. 2402. Removal of barriers to providing home and community-based services. 479

Sec. 2403. Money Follows the Person Rebalancing Demonstration. 488

Sec. 2404. Protection for recipients of home and community-based services 489

against spousal impoverishment.

Sec. 2405. Funding to expand State Aging and Disability Resource Centers. 490

Sec. 2406. Sense of the Senate regarding long-term care. 490

Subtitle F—Medicaid Prescription Drug Coverage 492

Sec. 2501. Prescription drug rebates. 492

Sec. 2502. Elimination of exclusion of coverage of certain drugs. 502

Sec. 2503. Providing adequate pharmacy reimbursement. 503

Subtitle G—Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) Payments 510

Sec. 2551. Disproportionate share hospital payments. 510

Subtitle H—Improved Coordination for Dual Eligible Beneficiaries 515

Sec. 2601. 5-year period for demonstration projects. 515

Sec. 2602. Providing Federal coverage and payment coordination for dual eligible 517

beneficiaries.

Subtitle I—Improving the Quality of Medicaid for Patients and Providers 522

Sec. 2701. Adult health quality measures. 522

Sec. 2702. Payment Adjustment for Health Care-Acquired Conditions. 526

Sec. 2703. State option to provide health homes for enrollees with chronic conditions. 528

Sec. 2704. Demonstration project to evaluate integrated care around a hospitalization. 538

6

Sec. 2705. Medicaid Global Payment System Demonstration Project. 542

Sec. 2706. Pediatric Accountable Care Organization Demonstration Project. 544

Sec. 2707. Medicaid emergency psychiatric demonstration project. 547

Subtitle J—Improvements to the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access 553

Commission (MACPAC)

Sec. 2801. MACPAC assessment of policies affecting all Medicaid beneficiaries. 553

Subtitle K—Protections for American Indians and Alaska Natives 565

Sec. 2901. Special rules relating to Indians. 565

Sec. 2902. Elimination of sunset for reimbursement for all medicare part B 567

services furnished by certain indian hospitals and clinics.

Subtitle L—Maternal and Child Health Services 568

Sec. 2951. Maternal, infant, and early childhood home visiting programs. 568

Sec. 2952. Support, education, and research for postpartum depression. 595

Sec. 2953. Personal responsibility education. 604

Sec. 2954. Restoration of funding for abstinence education. 618

Sec. 2955. Inclusion of information about the importance of having a health 619

care power of attorney in transition planning for children aging

out of foster care and independent living programs.

TITLE III—IMPROVING THE QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY OF

HEALTH CARE 621

Subtitle A—Transforming the Health Care Delivery System 621

PART I—LINKING PAYMENT TO QUALITY OUTCOMES UNDER THE

MEDICARE PROGRAM 621

Sec. 3001. Hospital Value-Based purchasing program. 622

Sec. 3002. Improvements to the physician quality reporting system. 652

Sec. 3003. Improvements to the physician feedback program. 658

Sec. 3004. Quality reporting for long-term care hospitals, inpatient rehabilitation

hospitals, and hospice programs. 663

Sec. 3005. Quality reporting for PPS-exempt cancer hospitals. 673

Sec. 3006. Plans for a Value-Based purchasing program for skilled nursing facilities

and home health agencies. 676

Sec. 3007. Value-based payment modifier under the physician fee schedule. 680

Sec. 3008. Payment adjustment for conditions acquired in hospitals. 687

PART II—NATIONAL STRATEGY TO IMPROVE HEALTH CARE QUALITY 692

Sec. 3011. National strategy. 692

Sec. 3012. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality. 699

Sec. 3013. Quality measure development. 702

Sec. 3014. Quality measurement. 709

Sec. 3015. Data collection; public reporting. 717

PART III—ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PATIENT CARE MODELS 723

Sec. 3021. Establishment of Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation

within CMS. 723

Sec. 3022. Medicare shared savings program. 739

Sec. 3023. National pilot program on payment bundling. 751

7

Sec. 3024. Independence at home demonstration program. 764

Sec. 3025. Hospital readmissions reduction program. 775

Sec. 3026. Community-Based Care Transitions Program. 789

Sec. 3027. Extension of gainsharing demonstration. 795

Subtitle B—Improving Medicare for Patients and Providers 796

PART I—ENSURING BENEFICIARY ACCESS TO PHYSICIAN CARE AND OTHER

SERVICES 796

Sec. 3101. Increase in the physician payment update. 796

Sec. 3102. Extension of the work geographic index floor and revisions to the 797

practice expense geographic adjustment under the Medicare

physician fee schedule.

Sec. 3103. Extension of exceptions process for Medicare therapy caps. 801

Sec. 3104. Extension of payment for technical component of certain physician 801

pathology services.

Sec. 3105. Extension of ambulance add-ons. 802

Sec. 3106. Extension of certain payment rules for long-term care hospital services 803

and of moratorium on the establishment of certain hospitals

and facilities.

Sec. 3107. Extension of physician fee schedule mental health add-on. 803

Sec. 3108. Permitting physician assistants to order post-Hospital extended care 803

services.

Sec. 3109. Exemption of certain pharmacies from accreditation requirements. 804

Sec. 3110. Part B special enrollment period for disabled TRICARE beneficiaries. 808

Sec. 3111. Payment for bone density tests. 810

Sec. 3112. Revision to the Medicare Improvement Fund. 813

Sec. 3113. Treatment of certain complex diagnostic laboratory tests. 813

Sec. 3114. Improved access for certified nurse-midwife services. 816

PART II—RURAL PROTECTIONS 817

Sec. 3121. Extension of outpatient hold harmless provision. 817

Sec. 3122. Extension of Medicare reasonable costs payments for certain clinical 818

diagnostic laboratory tests furnished to hospital patients in certain

rural areas.

Sec. 3123. Extension of the Rural Community Hospital Demonstration Program. 818

Sec. 3124. Extension of the Medicare-dependent hospital (MDH) program. 821

Sec. 3125. Temporary improvements to the Medicare inpatient hospital payment 822

adjustment for low-volume hospitals.

Sec. 3126. Improvements to the demonstration project on community health integration 824

models in certain rural counties.

Sec. 3127. MedPAC study on adequacy of Medicare payments for health care 825

providers serving in rural areas.

Sec. 3128. Technical correction related to critical access hospital services. 826

Sec. 3129. Extension of and revisions to Medicare rural hospital flexibility program. 826

PART III—IMPROVING PAYMENT ACCURACY 828

Sec. 3131. Payment adjustments for home health care. 828

Sec. 3132. Hospice reform. 836

Sec. 3133. Improvement to medicare disproportionate share hospital (DSH) 842

payments.

8

Sec. 3134. Misvalued codes under the physician fee schedule. 846

Sec. 3135. Modification of equipment utilization factor for advanced imaging 852

services.

Sec. 3136. Revision of payment for power-driven wheelchairs. 857

Sec. 3137. Hospital wage index improvement. 858

Sec. 3138. Treatment of certain cancer hospitals. 861

Sec. 3139. Payment for biosimilar biological products. 863

Sec. 3140. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration program. 865

Sec. 3141. Application of budget neutrality on a national basis in the calculation 867

of the Medicare hospital wage index floor.

Sec. 3142. HHS study on urban Medicare-dependent hospitals. 867

Subtitle C—Provisions Relating to Part C 869

Sec. 3201. Medicare Advantage payment. 869

Sec. 3202. Benefit protection and simplification. 903

Sec. 3203. Application of coding intensity adjustment during MA payment 908

transition.

Sec. 3204. Simplification of annual beneficiary election periods. 909

Sec. 3205. Extension for specialized MA plans for special needs individuals. 911

Sec. 3206. Extension of reasonable cost contracts. 918

Sec. 3207. Technical correction to MA private fee-for-service plans. 918

Sec. 3208. Making senior housing facility demonstration permanent. 919

Sec. 3209. Authority to deny plan bids. 920

Sec. 3210. Development of new standards for certain Medigap plans. 921

Subtitle D—Medicare Part D Improvements for Prescription Drug

Plans and MA–PD Plans 923

Sec. 3301. Medicare coverage gap discount program. 923

Sec. 3302. Improvement in determination of Medicare part D low-income 943

benchmark premium.

Sec. 3303. Voluntary de minimis policy for subsidy eligible individuals under 943

prescription drug plans and MA–PD plans.

Sec. 3304. Special rule for widows and widowers regarding eligibility for low income 945

assistance.

Sec. 3305. Improved information for subsidy eligible individuals reassigned to 946

prescription drug plans and MA–PD plans.

Sec. 3306. Funding outreach and assistance for low-income programs. 947

Sec. 3307. Improving formulary requirements for prescription drug plans and 950

MA–PD plans with respect to certain categories or classes of drugs.

Sec. 3308. Reducing part D premium subsidy for high-income beneficiaries. 952

Sec. 3309. Elimination of cost sharing for certain dual eligible individuals. 961

Sec. 3310. Reducing wasteful dispensing of outpatient prescription drugs in 962

long-term care facilities under prescription drug plans and

MA–PD plans.

Sec. 3311. Improved Medicare prescription drug plan and MA–PD plan complaint 963

system.

Sec. 3312. Uniform exceptions and appeals process for prescription drug plans 964

and MA–PD plans.

Sec. 3313. Office of the Inspector General studies and reports. 965

Sec. 3314. Including costs incurred by AIDS drug assistance programs and Indian 970

Health Service in providing prescription drugs toward the

annual out-of-pocket threshold under part D.

Sec. 3315. Immediate reduction in coverage gap in 2010. 972

9

Subtitle E—Ensuring Medicare Sustainability 974

Sec. 3401. Revision of certain market basket updates and incorporation of productivity 974

improvements into market basket updates that do not

already incorporate such improvements.

Sec. 3402. Temporary adjustment to the calculation of part B premiums. 999

Sec. 3403. Independent Medicare Advisory Board. 1,000

Subtitle F—Health Care Quality Improvements 1,053

Sec. 3501. Health care delivery system research; Quality improvement technical 1,053

assistance.

Sec. 3502. Establishing community health teams to support the patient-centered 1,067

medical home.

Sec. 3503. Medication management services in treatment of chronic disease. 1,075

Sec. 3504. Design and implementation of regionalized systems for emergency 1,081

care.

Sec. 3505. Trauma care centers and service availability. 1,091

Sec. 3506. Program to facilitate shared decision making. 1,105

Sec. 3507. Presentation of prescription drug benefit and risk information. 1,113

Sec. 3508. Demonstration program to integrate quality improvement and patient 1,115

safety training into clinical education of health professionals.

Sec. 3509. Improving women’s health. 1,118

Sec. 3510. Patient navigator program. 1,132

Sec. 3511. Authorization of appropriations. 1,133

TITLE IV—PREVENTION OF CHRONIC DISEASE AND IMPROVING 1,134

PUBLIC HEALTH

Subtitle A—Modernizing Disease Prevention and Public Health Systems 1,134

Sec. 4001. National Prevention, Health Promotion and Public Health Council. 1,134

Sec. 4002. Prevention and Public Health Fund. 1,141

Sec. 4003. Clinical and community preventive services. 1,142

Sec. 4004. Education and outreach campaign regarding preventive benefits. 1,150

Subtitle B—Increasing Access to Clinical Preventive Services 1,156

Sec. 4101. School-based health centers. 1,156

Sec. 4102. Oral healthcare prevention activities. 1,167

Sec. 4103. Medicare coverage of annual wellness visit providing a personalized 1,174

prevention plan.

Sec. 4104. Removal of barriers to preventive services in Medicare. 1,184

Sec. 4105. Evidence-based coverage of preventive services in Medicare. 1,189

Sec. 4106. Improving access to preventive services for eligible adults in Medicaid. 1,190

Sec. 4107. Coverage of comprehensive tobacco cessation services for pregnant 1,192

women in Medicaid.

Sec. 4108. Incentives for prevention of chronic diseases in Medicaid. 1,195

Subtitle C—Creating Healthier Communities 1,203

Sec. 4201. Community transformation grants. 1,203

Sec. 4202. Healthy aging, living well; evaluation of community-based prevention 1,209

and wellness programs for Medicare beneficiaries.

10

Sec. 4203. Removing barriers and improving access to wellness for individuals 1,220

with disabilities.

Sec. 4204. Immunizations. 1,221

Sec. 4205. Nutrition labeling of standard menu items at chain restaurants. 1,228

Sec. 4206. Demonstration project concerning individualized wellness plan. 1,237

Sec. 4207. Reasonable break time for nursing mothers. 1,239

Subtitle D—Support for Prevention and Public Health Innovation 1,240

Sec. 4301. Research on optimizing the delivery of public health services. 1,240

Sec. 4302. Understanding health disparities: data collection and analysis. 1,241

Sec. 4303. CDC and employer-based wellness programs. 1,252

Sec. 4304. Epidemiology-Laboratory Capacity Grants. 1,255

Sec. 4305. Advancing research and treatment for pain care management. 1,257

Sec. 4306. Funding for Childhood Obesity Demonstration Project. 1,265

Subtitle E—Miscellaneous Provisions 1,265

Sec. 4401. Sense of the Senate concerning CBO scoring. 1,265

Sec. 4402. Effectiveness of Federal health and wellness initiatives. 1,265

TITLE V—HEALTH CARE WORKFORCE 1,266

Subtitle A—Purpose and Definitions 1,266

Sec. 5001. Purpose. 1,266

Sec. 5002. Definitions. 1,267

Subtitle B—Innovations in the Health Care Workforce 1,278

Sec. 5101. National health care workforce commission. 1,278

Sec. 5102. State health care workforce development grants. 1,297

Sec. 5103. Health care workforce assessment. 1,309

Subtitle C—Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce 1,316

Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds. 1,316

Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program. 1,318

Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs. 1,319

Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs. 1,324

Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs. 1,329

Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs. 1,331

Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps. 1,333

Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics. 1,334

Sec. 5209. Elimination of cap on commissioned Corps. 1,336

Sec. 5210. Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps. 1,336

Subtitle D—Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training 1,339

Sec. 5301. Training in family medicine, general internal medicine,

general pediatrics, and physician assistantship. 1,339

Sec. 5302. Training opportunities for direct care workers. 1,346

Sec. 5303. Training in general, pediatric, and public health dentistry. 1,349

Sec. 5304. Alternative dental health care providers demonstration project. 1,355

Sec. 5305. Geriatric education and training; career awards;

comprehensive geriatric education. 1,359

Sec. 5306. Mental and behavioral health education and training grants. 1,368

11

Sec. 5307. Cultural competency, prevention, and public health and individuals 1,374

with disabilities training.

Sec. 5308. Advanced nursing education grants. 1,377

Sec. 5309. Nurse education, practice, and retention grants. 1,378

Sec. 5310. Loan repayment and scholarship program. 1,382

Sec. 5311. Nurse faculty loan program. 1,384

Sec. 5312. Authorization of appropriations for parts B through D of Title VIII. 1,389

Sec. 5313. Grants to promote the community health workforce. 1,389

Sec. 5314. Fellowship training in public health. 1,395

Sec. 5315. United States Public Health Sciences Track. 1,397

Subtitle E—Supporting the Existing Health Care Workforce 1,411

Sec. 5401. Centers of excellence. 1,411

Sec. 5402. Health care professionals training for diversity. 1,416

Sec. 5403. Interdisciplinary, community-based linkages. 1,417

Sec. 5404. Workforce diversity grants. 1,430

Sec. 5405. Primary care extension program. 1,431

Subtitle F—Strengthening Primary Care and Other Workforce Improvements 1,440

Sec. 5501. Expanding access to primary care services and general surgery services. 1,440

Sec. 5502. Medicare Federally qualified health center improvements. 1,446

Sec. 5503. Distribution of additional residency positions. 1,449

Sec. 5504. Counting resident time in outpatient settings and allowing flexibility 1,458

for jointly operated residency training programs.

Sec. 5505. Rules for counting resident time for didactic and scholarly activities 1,461

and other activities.

Sec. 5506. Preservation of resident cap positions from closed hospitals. 1,465

Sec. 5507. Demonstration projects To address health professions workforce 1,469

needs; extension of family-to-family health information centers.

Sec. 5508. Increasing teaching capacity. 1,485

Sec. 5509. Graduate nurse education demonstration. 1,500

Subtitle G—Improving Access to Health Care Services 1,508

Sec. 5601. Spending for Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). 1,508

Sec. 5602. Negotiated rulemaking for development of methodology and criteria 1,510

for designating medically underserved populations and health

professions shortage areas.

Sec. 5603. Reauthorization of the Wakefield Emergency Medical Services for 1,514

Children Program.

Sec. 5604. Co-locating primary and specialty care in community-based mental 1,515

health settings.

Sec. 5605. Key National indicators. 1,518

Subtitle H—General Provisions 1,528

Sec. 5701. Reports. 1,528

TITLE VI—TRANSPARENCY AND PROGRAM INTEGRITY 1,529

Subtitle A—Physician Ownership and Other Transparency 1,529

Sec. 6001. Limitation on Medicare exception to the prohibition

on certain physician referrals for hospitals. 1,529

12

Sec. 6002. Transparency reports and reporting of physician 1,542

ownership or investment interests.

Sec. 6003. Disclosure requirements for in-office ancillary services exception to 1,564

the prohibition on physician self-referral for certain imaging services.

Sec. 6004. Prescription drug sample transparency. 1,564

Sec. 6005. Pharmacy benefit managers transparency requirements. 1,567

Subtitle B—Nursing Home Transparency and Improvement 1,571

PART I—IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY OF INFORMATION 1,571

Sec. 6101. Required disclosure of ownership and additional disclosable parties 1,571

information.

Sec. 6102. Accountability requirements for skilled nursing facilities and nursing 1,579

facilities.

Sec. 6103. Nursing home compare Medicare website. 1,585

Sec. 6104. Reporting of expenditures. 1,603

Sec. 6105. Standardized complaint form. 1,605

Sec. 6106. Ensuring staffing accountability. 1,607

Sec. 6107. GAO study and report on Five-Star Quality Rating System. 1,609

PART II—TARGETING ENFORCEMENT 1610

Sec. 6111. Civil money penalties. 1,610

Sec. 6112. National independent monitor demonstration project. 1,619

Sec. 6113. Notification of facility closure. 1,625

Sec. 6114. National demonstration projects on culture change and use of information 1,628

technology in nursing homes.

PART III—IMPROVING STAFF TRAINING 1,630

Sec. 6121. Dementia and abuse prevention training. 1,630

Subtitle C—Nationwide Program for National and State Background Checks 1,632

on Direct Patient Access Employees of Long-term Care Facilities and Providers

Sec. 6201. Nationwide program for National and State background checks on 1,632

direct patient access employees of long-term care facilities and

providers.

Subtitle D—Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1,648

Sec. 6301. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. 1,648

Sec. 6302. Federal coordinating council for comparative effectiveness research. 1,702

Subtitle E—Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP Program Integrity Provisions 1,703

Sec. 6401. Provider screening and other enrollment requirements under Medicare, 1,703

Medicaid, and CHIP.

Sec. 6402. Enhanced Medicare and Medicaid program integrity provisions. 1,720

Sec. 6403. Elimination of duplication between the Healthcare Integrity and 1,747

Protection Data Bank and the National Practitioner Data

Bank.

Sec. 6404. Maximum period for submission of Medicare claims reduced to not 1,760

more than 12 months.

13

Sec. 6405. Physicians who order items or services required to be Medicare enrolled 1,762

physicians or eligible professionals.

Sec. 6406. Requirement for physicians to provide documentation on referrals to 1,764

programs at high risk of waste and abuse.

Sec. 6407. Face to face encounter with patient required before physicians may 1,765

certify eligibility for home health services or durable medical

equipment under Medicare.

Sec. 6408. Enhanced penalties. 1,768

Sec. 6409. Medicare self-referral disclosure protocol. 1,773

Sec. 6410. Adjustments to the Medicare durable medical equipment, prosthetics, 1,775

orthotics, and supplies competitive acquisition program.

Sec. 6411. Expansion of the Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program. 1,777

Subtitle F—Additional Medicaid Program Integrity Provisions 1,778

Sec. 6501. Termination of provider participation under Medicaid if terminated 1,783

under Medicare or other State plan.

Sec. 6502. Medicaid exclusion from participation relating to certain ownership, 1,783

control, and management affiliations.

Sec. 6503. Billing agents, clearinghouses, or other alternate payees required to 1,784

Sec. 6504. Requirement to report expanded set of data elements under MMIS 1,785

to detect fraud and abuse.

Sec. 6505. Prohibition on payments to institutions or entities located outside of 1,786

the United States.

Sec. 6506. Overpayments. 1,786

Sec. 6507. Mandatory State use of national correct coding initiative. 1,788

Sec. 6508. General effective date. 1,790

Subtitle G—Additional Program Integrity Provisions 1,791

Sec. 6601. Prohibition on false statements and representations. 1,791

Sec. 6602. Clarifying definition. 1,793

Sec. 6603. Development of model uniform report form. 1,793

Sec. 6604. Applicability of State law to combat fraud and abuse. 1,794

Sec. 6605. Enabling the Department of Labor to issue administrative summary 1,795

cease and desist orders and summary seizures orders against

plans that are in financially hazardous condition.

Sec. 6606. MEWA plan registration with Department of Labor. 1,797

Sec. 6607. Permitting evidentiary privilege and confidential communications. 1,797

Subtitle H—Elder Justice Act 1,798

Sec. 6701. Short title of subtitle. 1,798

Sec. 6702. Definitions. 1,799

Sec. 6703. Elder Justice. 1,799

Subtitle I—Sense of the Senate Regarding Medical Malpractice 1,858

Sec. 6801. Sense of the Senate regarding medical malpractice. 1,858

TITLE VII—IMPROVING ACCESS TO INNOVATIVE MEDICAL 1,859

THERAPIES

Subtitle A—Biologics Price Competition and Innovation 1,859

Sec. 7001. Short title. 1,859

Sec. 7002. Approval pathway for biosimilar biological products. 1,859

14

Sec. 7003. Savings. 1,906

Subtitle B—More Affordable Medicines for Children and Underserved 1,906

Communities

Sec. 7101. Expanded participation in 340B program. 1,906

Sec. 7102. Improvements to 340B program integrity. 1,913

Sec. 7103. GAO study to make recommendations on improving the 340B program. 1,924

TITLE VIII—CLASS ACT 1,925

Sec. 8001. Short title of title. 1,925

Sec. 8002. Establishment of national voluntary insurance program for purchasing 1,925

community living assistance services and support.

TITLE IX—REVENUE PROVISIONS 1,979

Subtitle A—Revenue Offset Provisions 1,979

Sec. 9001. Excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage. 1,979

Sec. 9002. Inclusion of cost of employer-sponsored health coverage on W–2. 1,996

Sec. 9003. Distributions for medicine qualified only if for prescribed drug or insulin. 1,997

Sec. 9004. Increase in additional tax on distributions from HSAs and Archer 1,998

MSAs not used for qualified medical expenses.

Sec. 9005. Limitation on health flexible spending arrangements under cafeteria 1,999

plans.

Sec. 9006. Expansion of information reporting requirements. 1,999

Sec. 9007. Additional requirements for charitable hospitals. 2,001

Sec. 9008. Imposition of annual fee on branded prescription pharmaceutical 2,010

manufacturers and importers.

Sec. 9009. Imposition of annual fee on medical device manufacturers and importers. 2,020

Sec. 9010. Imposition of annual fee on health insurance providers. 2,026

Sec. 9011. Study and report of effect on veterans health care. 2,033

Sec. 9012. Elimination of deduction for expenses allocable to Medicare Part D 2,034

subsidy.

Sec. 9013. Modification of itemized deduction for medical expenses. 2,034

Sec. 9014. Limitation on excessive remuneration paid by certain health insurance 2,035

providers.

Sec. 9015. Additional hospital insurance tax on high-income taxpayers. 2,040

Sec. 9016. Modification of section 833 treatment of certain health organizations. 2,044

Sec. 9017. Excise tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures. 2,045

Subtitle B—Other Provisions 2,047

Sec. 9021. Exclusion of health benefits provided by Indian tribal governments. 2,047

Sec. 9022. Establishment of simple cafeteria plans for small businesses. 2,050

Sec. 9023. Qualifying therapeutic discovery project credit 2,057

(Note – Page 2074 is the last page of the document.)

(11/19/09)

_____________________________

Text of HR 3590: http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act.pdf

Gary Glenn Responds to Regrettable Mormon Church Decision to Back ‘Gay Rights’ Laws

Peterlab — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:14:49 +0000

Below is an informative piece by my friend Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan about the awful decision by the LDS Church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) to support legislation granting legal protections based on homosexuality. Gary of AFA-Michigan writes:

A Shocker from Salt Lake City:

The LDS (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) Church now officially endorses so-called “gay rights” laws, specifically a Salt Lake City law prohibiting “discrimination” on the basis of “sexual orientation” (homosexual behavior) and “gender identity” (cross-dressing).

From the official LDS Church website: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories/church-supports-nondiscrimination-ordinances

ASSOCIATED PRESS: “Mormons throw support behind gay-rights cause”

DESERET NEWS: “Mormon church supports Salt Lake City’s protections for gay rights”

Astoundingly, both the Massachusetts and California supreme courts expressly and specifically cited their states’ identical “sexual orientation” laws regarding employment and housing as a legal justification for their rulings legalizing so-called homosexual “marriage.” That indisputable fact alone renders the Church spokesman’s claim that its endorsement of the “sexual orientation” ordinance poses no threat to marriage to be utter nonsense, especially since the Church’s new position will certainly boost homosexual activists’ ongoing efforts in the Utah Legislature to enact an identical state law.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, Goodridge v. Mass. Dept. of Health: “Several amici suggest that prohibiting marriage by same-sex couples reflects community consensus that homosexual conduct is immoral. Yet Massachusetts has a strong affirmative policy of preventing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. See G.L. c. 151B (employment, housing, credit, services); G.L. c. 265, § 39 (hate crimes); G.L. c. 272, § 98 (public accommodation).” Page14 at: http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/conlaw/goodridge111803opn.pdf

California Supreme Court, In Re: Marriage Cases: “See, for example, Civil Code section 51 (barring sexual orientation discrimination in the provision of services by any business establishment); Government Code sections 12920 (barring sexual orientation discrimination in employment), 12955 (barring sexual orientation discrimination in housing)… In light of this recognition, sections 1 and 7 of article I of the California Constitution cannot properly be interpreted to withhold from gay individuals the same basic civil right of personal autonomy and liberty — including the right to establish, with the person of one’s choice, an officially recognized and sanctioned family — that the California Constitution affords to heterosexual individuals.” pp 68-69 at: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S147999.PDF

U.S. House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, reaffirmed the threat such “sexual orientation” laws pose to marriage in commenting on the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), legislation which would add “sexual orientation” to federal civil rights laws regarding employment. If enacted, Boehner said, ENDA would “put activist judges in the position of imposing same-sex marriage and civil union laws on states. Simply by using ENDA as the basis of their decisions – just as state Supreme Courts have done with state-level ENDA laws in the past – liberal judges will be empowered under this legislation to single-handedly undermine state and federal marriage laws across the country. I’m disappointed that the Majority turned back a straightforward proposal offered by House Republicans to protect state and federal marriage laws from being overturned, modified, or restricted by activist judges as a result of this deeply flawed legislation.” http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=78178

Such laws have also been used to discriminate against and punish individuals and businesses who refuse to approve of homosexual behavior and cross-dressing.

It is difficult to believe that LDS officials could be so grossly ignorant of the demonstrably proven threat such laws pose to marriage and to the religious freedoms of the individual, special exemptions for “religious organizations” and the government notwithstanding. It’s further astounding that church officials would endorse a law banning “discrimination” based on “gender identity,” rendering it illegal for an employer to refuse to hire a man because he (1) dresses as and claims to believe he’s a woman; and (2) demands on that basis to use the women’s restroom at work.

It’s notable in contrast that the Catholic Church refuses to endorse forcing such “sexual orientation” laws on the rest of society just because homosexual activists are politically calculating enough to (at least temporarily) exempt churches. [Editor's Note: in certain areas such as Maine, Catholic bishops or leaders have endorsed homosexual activist laws against the teachings of their Church; such backing in heavily Catholic states usually makes the difference in passage of pro-homosexual legislation.]

From a Vatican directive instructing Catholic bishops to oppose so-called “sexual orientation” laws: “Where a matter of the common good is concerned, it is inappropriate for church authorities to endorse or remain neutral toward adverse legislation even if it grants exceptions to church organizations and institutions. The church has the responsibility to promote family life and the public morality of the entire civil society on the basis of fundamental moral values, not simply to protect herself from the application of harmful laws.” http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFHOMOL.htm

We deeply sympathize with the shock that will no doubt be felt by many members of the LDS Church who do understand the implications of so-called “sexual orientation” laws and have expended great effort to oppose them and to educate others.

For example…

Meridian Magazine / The Place Where Latter-day Saints Gather: “Of course, the problem here is that the term ’sexual orientation’ has no innate meaning (in contrast with ‘race’, which does) and no historic or community value (such as ‘religion’) and would require the Utah State Legislature to fabricate its definition. In other words, adding the term ’sexual orientation’ to Utah law, as demanded (by homosexual activists), would give lawyers standing to attack employers and property owners.” http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/090204six.html

United Famlies International: “We adamantly oppose the UNHRC sexual orientation provisions for three reasons: 1. Attempts to legalize same sex marriage around the world would be substantially strengthened if homosexual behavior becomes an internationally recognized ‘human right.’” http://meridianmagazine.com/familywatch/040319newsletter.html

UFI brochure on “Sexual Orientation,” perhaps the best and most comprehensive single source on the subject we’ve ever seen… http://unitedfamilies.org/products/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=17

Homosexual Agenda Bills in Congress 2009

Peterlab — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:07:01 +0000

We apologize for the coding errors in yesterday’s AFTAH e-mail about President Obama’s “Family Day” promotion of “same-sex” (homosexual) parenting and are working to fix the problem.

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

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

Obama’s Homosexual OPM Chief Calls ENDA Top Priority, ‘Keystone’ that Will Propel Rest of ‘Gay’ Legislation

Peterlab — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:20:22 +0000

Says DOMA was motivated by “hate and discrimination” in calling for repeal

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….

‘Million Taxpayers March’ on DC? Massive Tea Party Protest Floods Nation’s Capital

Peterlab — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 04:12:42 +0000

Yes, change is coming to Washington; AP distorts size of huge Tea Party rally

TAKE ACTION: Call and write your U.S. Congressman and Senators (202-224-3121; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org) and urge them to oppose the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA; HR 2981) as a Big Government bill that would empower the federal government to force small businesses to subsidize homosexual and gender-confused lifestyles.

By Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.com

Dear AFTAH Readers,

Just in case you are still relying on establishment liberal media like the Associated Press (AP) to get your news, here are some startling photos and links documenting the mammoth, conservative “Tea Party Express” march in our nation’s capital Saturday, September 12th. This was a grassroots taxpayers’ protest of historic proportions — not in the “tens of thousands,” as AP misreported, but between one and two million people coming to make their voice heard in Washington.

I have been to a few big marches on Washington — including the annual March for Life and (as a critical observer) the homosexual activists’ March on Washington in 1993 (Click HERE to watch a very revealing YouTube video about that radical event). Based on the photos of Saturday’s tea party in D.C., this march appears to have dwarfed those past mobilizations. And try as the liberals will to paint Saturday’s marchers as a bunch of extremists, these are regular Americans, many of which had never attended a D.C. mass rally before. (But try this for a glimpse of the extreme 1993 “gay” rally, which had much smaller numbers.)

The Left is already moving to discredit the massive conservative turnout — jumping all over a false claim that ABC News reported the march as drawing between 1 million and 1.5 million. (We hope the Park Service will come up with a fair estimate, but even if they don’t aerial photos tell the story.) When even the left-wing MSNBC (NBC reporter Tom Costello) goes off script and reports that “hundreds of thousands” took part in the rally, you know something very significant has happened in Washington [watch Costello's MSNBC report HERE]. The New York Times reported:

“Many came on their own and were not part of an organization or group. But the magnitude of the rally took the authorities by surprise, with throngs of people streaming from the White House to Capitol Hill for more than three hours.”

Here are some important websites that tell the real story about this huge rally in D.C.:

Obviously moved by the enormity of the 9/12 march, the British newspaper Daily Mail — hardly sympathetic to American conservatives — reported (emphasis added): “A million march to US Capitol to protest against ‘Obama the socialist.’” However, the Daily Mail’s original headline was: “Up to two million march to US Capitol to protest against Obama’s spending in ‘tea-party’ demonstration” (it appears that the DM’s editors made some politically correct revisions);
Michelle Malkin’s original story on the 9/12 march: “Yes, the picture is real, nutroots” [see photo at right]
Malkin’s follow-up web article: “Celebrating the 9/12 rallies; Turnout estimated at 2 million” ;
WorldNetDaily.com story on 9/12: “A million or more rock Washington: Taxpayer march could be biggest rally ever in capital”;
WND founder Joseph Farah’s column: “The shameful non-coverage of 9/12″;
9/12 elapsed-time footage of D.C. protesters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sjvc6baor8
Glenn Beck web page with more photos of 9/12 march: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/30493/

It deserves remembering that smug, out-of-touch media types like Rachel Maddow, MSNBC’s resident lesbian leftist, her über-obnoxious fellow MSNBC talker Keith Olbermann, and CNN’s Anderson Cooper viciously mocked the initial mass “tea party” protests with smirking jabs attaching them to “teabagging” — which, as it turns out, is a twisted oral sex act popularized by homosexual activist filmmaker John Waters’ movie “Pecker.” It was certainly a low point in the history of U.S. media to watch highly paid TV celebrities airing their inside dirty joke that compared decent, concerned Americans to a modern perversion. (Thankfully, most normal Americans didn’t know what “teabagging” was.)

Perhaps the liberal media elite’s snide condescension toward everyday Americans simply voicing their discontent — including suggestions that the protesters are racist because President Obama is black — accounted for an extra few hundred thousand protesters arriving in D.C. Saturday to make their presence felt. And that they did: even Maddow, Olbermann and the Huffington Post will have a tough time explaining away these seven-figure crowd numbers.

What does all this have to do with the fight against the Homosexual Lobby? Well, for one, beyond the health care debate, the Obama Administration is pushing to enact a comprehensive “gay” agenda that would greatly expand the government’s power to effectively force businesses and individuals to approve of or subsidize immoral homosexual and “transgender” lifestyles. The Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA) — slated for a House hearing Wednesday, Sept. 23 — would create federal homosexuality- and transsexuality-based “rights” for employees. This would invariably circumscribe the liberties of business owners who oppose homosexuality as a matter of conscience. Our religious and First Amendment freedoms are at stake in this debate.

We trust that the same people who oppose Big Government intruding into our lives will resist the idea that the Government should be forcing businessmen and businesswomen to support homosexual behavior and gender confusion or risk getting sued.

NBC reporter Tom Costello reported that “hundreds of thousands” took part in the rally; the actual number was likely over a million.

The AP photo above belies the news organization’s own reportage that numbered the massive crowd in the mere “tens of thousands.”

VIDEO: Michelle Obama’s 2008 Speech to the DNC’s Gay and Lesbian Leadership Council

Peterlab — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 12:51:07 +0000

Calls Prop 8 “divisive,” touts DOMA repeal, links “Selma to Stonewall”

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

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

“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (Romans 1:26-27)

_______________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you.

Maddow Stumbles on Obama-Care and Transsexual ‘Sex-Change’ Surgeries: Barber

Peterlab — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:13:04 +0000

Maddow Misinformation: MSNBC’s resident lesbian activist Rachel Maddow (left) lied about Matt Barber’s press statement regarding the potential of Obama-Care to become “Tranny-Care” by mandating coverage for body-disfiguring transsexual “sex change” operations.

Folks, we hope that Rachel Maddow (left) — the lesbian MSNBC talker who is as “out” in her homosexuality promotion as in her left-wing activism — takes up the offer of my good friend Matt Barber and lets him appear as a guest on her show. That seems only fair after Maddow lied about Barber’s statement on Obama-care and “sex-change” operations.

We understand that liberals don’t want to talk (rationally, anyway) about Obama-care covering abortions and grotesque transsexual “sex-change” procedures as “health care.” That is why we must discuss these awful possibilities. (By the way, even before Barber’s column, below, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blog noted that President Obama’s favorite think tank, the liberal-left Center for American Progress, was beating the drums for adding “sex change operations to the list of medical procedures that all health insurance policies in the nation must cover.”) — Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.com

BANQUET REMINDER: Culture warrior and former professional boxer Matt Barber (right) is coming to Chicago on Saturday, Oct. 24 to keynote the AFTAH fundraising banquet. The dinner is being held at the Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL, and tickets are $50 per person. You can prepay online (just note “AFTAH banquet” in the Paypal or Credit Card form) or mail your check (designate it “AFTAH Banquet”) to: Americans For Truth, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. Please spread the word and make plans to come! E-mail aftahangela@gmail.com or americansfortruth@comcast.net for more information.

_____________________________

Matt Barber writes:

Sex-Change-apalooza: ObamaCare Likely to Mandate Free ‘Sex-Change’ Surgeries

By Matt Barber, August 5, 2009

I got a call a couple days ago from a producer with MSNBC. He wanted a hard copy of a press release I sent out entitled: “ObamaCare Likely to Mandate Free ‘Sex-Change’ Surgeries.” In the release I addressed the likelihood that, under Obama’s monolithic socialized healthcare scheme, taxpayers may well end up funding elective and entirely cosmetic “gender reassignment” surgeries. I was happy to oblige and asked which program he produced. “Rachel Maddow,” he reluctantly divulged. I chuckled and joked, “Oh, I’m sure Rachel will give me a glowing review.”

I then suggested that it would be better still if Rachel actually had me on the show to defend and debate the substance of my release. He declined. Understandable, though. Ms. Maddow—a hard-left lesbian activist who plays a pseudo-journalist on TV—certainly wouldn’t want me confusing all 242 of her wide-eyed, spoon-fed, Kool-Aid swilling viewers with the facts. (By the way, Rachel, sweetheart, if you have the guts, the offer still stands.)

In what was apparently an awkward attempt at ridicule, Maddow then focused like a laser on the title of my release. True to form, she twisted and spun like the Michelle Kwan of yellow journalism. I was disappointed. Not because she transparently distorted my words. I counted on that. I was disappointed because I actually expected the allegedly clever, Oxford educated talking-head to pull it off with some degree of satirical dexterity.

She did not.

Did Maddow mock me for suggesting that ObamCare might provide taxpayer funded “sex-change” operations? No. Did she deride me for mean-spiritedness, insensitivity and “transphobia”? No. Instead, she just lied. She dishonestly suggested that I claimed the government was going to “mandate sex-change operations.” Get it? That, if ObamaCare becomes reality, healthcare officials will knock down your door, drag you away and force you to undergo a “gender reassignment” surgery. I know—Silly.

Still, what Maddow didn’t say speaks volumes. She didn’t refute any of the substance of my release. She didn’t deny the real likelihood that such cosmetic procedures will be covered at taxpayer expense. And she certainly didn’t give me the opportunity to respond to her propagandist obfuscation.

But it didn’t stop with Maddow. Those adorable, patchouli soaked little left-wing lemmings at the Daily Kos, Wonkette and elsewhere also picked up on my release. I was surprised to see that many of them, in fact, agreed with the substance of my argument. Quite a few opined that “sex-change” surgeries should be covered at taxpayer expense and a number of them conceded that they almost certainly will.

So what prompted me to break this story in the first place? Well, when Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT) asked Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) whether President Obama’s proposed socialized healthcare plan will mandate taxpayer funded abortion, she admitted that it will require “any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate.” It now appears that the plan’s “medically appropriate” umbrella is far more expansive than most Americans could have imagined.

In addition to abortion on demand, the weight of the evidence indicates that, in fact, cosmetic “gender reassignment” surgeries for both U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants who suffer from APA recognized “Gender Identity Disorder” (GID) may indeed be provided—free of charge—courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. The current price tag for such a procedure can exceed $50,000.

Page 972 of the House version of the bill (H.R. 3200) provides for “standards, as appropriate, for the collection of accurate data on health and health care” based on “sex, sexual orientation [and] gender identity.” [Click HERE to read Peter Fleckenstein analysis of HR 3200 posted by Liberty Counsel.] The Senate draft indicates that the government will “detect and monitor trends in health disparities,” requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to “develop standards for the measurement of¬†gender.” (i.e., officially recognize subjectively self-determined “transgender” or “transsexual” gender identities). It further mandates “participation in the institutions’ programs of individuals and groups from…different genders and sexual orientations.”

So, does ObamaCare expressly stipulate that taxpayer funded “sex-change” operations will be provided? No, but neither does it explicitly require coverage for heart bypass surgery. Don’t forget; we’re talking about what’s “medically appropriate” here, and look who gets to make that subjective determination: Your doctor? No, it’s “Rachel Maddow-minded” bureaucrats within the Democratic Party. It’s a liberal-Democrat appointed government “Health Benefits Advisory Committee.” And if you think they’re not itching to pay back the homosexual, transgender and pro-abortion pressure groups that helped get them elected, I’ve got a house at 1600 Pennsylvania I want to sell you.

Still, there’s a gulf of difference between what Obama and liberals in Congress, and the American people deem “medically appropriate;” especially when it’s “we the people” footing the bill. It’s unconscionable to force Americans, against their conscience, to fund abortion on demand and to facilitate gender confusion by subsidizing the elective practice of genital “sex-change” mutilation.

But don’t just take my word for it. After hearing Sen. Mikulski’s “any service deemed…medically appropriate” admission, I was prompted to dig a little deeper. I contacted the offices of Sen. Harry Reid, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Rep. Barney Frank and the House Subcommittee on Health. I asked, very simply, for “an assurance that the proposed healthcare plan will not allow taxpayer funded ‘gender reassignment’ surgeries or hormone therapies.” When faced with the bill’s relevant language, every staffer I spoke with either declined to answer or would neither confirm nor deny that such procedures would be covered.

Indeed it’s no wonder that—as Americans find out what’s hidden within this socialized ObamaCare monstrosity—support for the plan is plummeting faster than MSNBC’s ratings.

It’s time for the mainstream press—yes you too Rachel Maddow—to do its job and demand straight answers. Instead of prancing around like little ObamaCare cheerleaders, journalists need to ask the same questions I did and refuse to take “no answer” for an answer.

But don’t hold your breath.

Thankfully, we don’t have to. Wanna have a little fun? Contact your Congressional representative (202-224-3121; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org) and ask the following question: “Will you personally guarantee that, under this plan, no taxpayer dollars will go to fund abortion or ‘sex-change’ operations?’”

Then sit back and watch them squirm.

Matt Barber is a Board Member of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), and an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action. Click HERE for information on Barber’s appearance as keynote speaker at AFTAH’s fund-raising banquet on Saturday, Oct. 24. Send comments to Matt at: jmattbarber@comcast.net .

One Man’s ‘Hate’ Is Another Man’s Moral Code

Peterlab — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:09:32 +0000

We sent the following response to the latest letter to AFTAH from “Richard,” a frequent critic of our work. Richard’s letter follows ours below:

Who defines “hate,” Richard? By classifying the outworking of Christianity and other major religions’ teachings against homosexuality as “hate,” you and fellow pro-homosexual activists become haters of a different sort, though you are blind to your hypocrisy. You despise (hate) the wisdom of Judeo-Christian tradition (on your pet issue) and you abhor (hate) the Bible’s clear teachings against homosexual practice. And then revisionist “gay theologians” cynically attempt to redefine the Word of God by whitewashing the sin of homosexual behavior.

All this leads you to vilify as “haters” those who simply disagree with you — i.e., well-meaning men and women who love God’s teachings on sex and marriage and try their best to follow them.

Your side especially excels at demonizing groups like Americans For Truth and people who counter the well-heeled “Gay” Lobby by defending historic morality in the public square. You regularly smear us as “haters” and homo-”phobes” when we have no hatred or irrational fear in our hearts. That is a mean (and hateful) thing to do to people of faith — even though I understand it as a utilitarian political tactic designed to advance your pro-homosexual agenda. Many pro-family and pro-traditional-marriage advocates across the country have felt the sting of “gay” activist hate.

As to public policy on homosexuality and transsexuality, it is completely irrational to base “civil rights” on changeable, destructive and unnatural sexual/gender misbehavior — as opposed to unchangeable skin color. (There are zero “ex-Blacks” but thousands of ex-”gays.”) Homosexuality-based “rights” invariably war against religious freedom, as the (hateful) homosexual activist campaigns against the Boy Scouts of America, Prop 8 in California, and other religious organizations and individuals demonstrate. Your intolerant sexual agenda undermines true liberty by using the government to circumscribe Americans’ freedom to adhere to their moral beliefs; this is the un-American end result of “sexual orientation” laws. Unfortunately for you, religious freedom is sacrosanct in this nation; we hope it will remain so and that the courts will uphold citizens’ constitutional right not to affirm and subsidize behavior they consider immoral.

Do you want to see the face of hate, Richard? Look in the mirror. Let me leave you with this plea: repent of your sins and follow God. He will wipe your slate clean. Jesus Christ loves sinners, but He does “hate” sin, and died in our place so that we could spend eternity with God, and not face the judgment we surely deserve as sinners who constantly fall short of His righteous and holy standard. I will ask AFTAH readers to pray for you.

Peter LaBarbera
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
www.aftah.org

——————————————————————————–
Richard’s letter to Americans For Truth:

From: Richard S.
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 1:29 AM
To: americansfortruth@comcast.net
Subject: [AFT Web Site] Freedom to Disagree

The following message was sent from the Americans for Truth Web site:

——————————————————————————–
Yes Peter, AFTAH and all other hate groups in America have complete freedom to publish, preach, and teach all the hate they choose to publish, preach, and teach. The Constitution holds for all. What hates [sic] groups such as AFTAH can not do is discriminate based on sexual orientation, gender expression, sex, race, or religion in public accomodations [sic], employment, and other areas of public life. It is really rather simple: in public act civilized, in private hate anyone you wish as hatefully as you wish. I note you never publish nor reply to my rational and truthful letters. Odd, that is.

Watered Down Hate Crimes Measure Advances in Senate

Peterlab — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 18:53:53 +0000

Dear AFTAH Readers,

A watered-down version of the “hate crimes” amendment passed the Senate last night. I watched on CSPAN as Sen. Brownback (R-KS) offered a successful amendment adopting language from the Religious Freedom Restoration Act — protecting all speech except that specifically intended to incite violence. Brownback’s amendment would make it harder for overzealous, pro-homosexual prosecutors to use the “hate crimes” law to suppress moral speech and Bible preaching against homosexuality.

AP reports: “Republicans will have the opportunity to propose several more changes to the hate crimes bill on Monday, but that will not change its status as part of the must-pass defense bill.” The “hate crimes” measure — outrageously attached by the Democrats to a DoD spending bill — remains a dangerous Trojan Horse.

TAKE ACTION: Urge your Senators to challenge other portions of the “hate crimes” amendment, such as language that would make it the first federal law to create federal “civil rights” protections based on gender confusion (”gender identity”). Call Congress at 202-224-3121 or write your Senators through www.congress.org.

Despite the AP’s characterization, “hate crimes” still might not become law as President Obama could veto the defense bill to which it is attached (he objects to some military spending in the bill). Keep checking our website, www.aftah.org, for more details. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; donate online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/

P.S. Remember Arthur Goldberg’s dinner-talk TONIGHT at AFTAH’s office in Carol Stream:

Dinner-Lecture July 17: Arthur Goldberg, Co-Director of JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality), will be the featured speaker at AFTAH’s next dinner lecture on Friday, July 17. Dinner starts at 6:00 PM and Arthur’s talk and Q&A will run from 7:00-9:00. Arthur will be discussing his new book, “Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change” [order HERE]. You will not want to miss this informative presentation from a man who — although not ex-”gay” himself — knows firsthand the reality that men and women can leave the homosexual lifestyle because that is his life’s work. RSVP to Angela at aftahangela@gmail.com. AFTAH’s office is at 25W560 Geneva Rd. in Carol Stream, IL (just west of Gary on Geneva Rd.). Donations will be accepted to cover expenses.

Letter to a Critic: Will You Respect and Defend OUR Freedom to Disagree?

Peterlab — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:09:18 +0000

Hope for Homosexuals: Rev. Mario Bergner, founder of Redeemed Lives, once practiced homosexuality, but is now happily married to wife Nancy and the father of five kids. Through Redeemed Lives, Bergner helps others overcome sexual sin patterns through a relationship with Jesus Christ. In his article, “Go and Sin No More,” he writes, “The most loving thing we can do for anyone caught in the grips of sexual sin is to help them bring their sin to the Cross of Jesus and there find forgiveness, redemption, healing and hope for a new beginning.” For more information on Redeemed Lives, based outside Boston, Massachusetts, click HERE or call 978-356-0404.

I sent a version of the following letter to Jeff, who wrote Americans For Truth in February urging us to respect the “civil rights” of homosexuals (who he believes are born that way). Jeff’s letter is beneath mine at bottom. — Peter LaBarbera:

Peter LaBarbera’s Letter to Jeff:

…Jeff, I doubt the accuracy of your numbers (I believe 1-3 percent of the population is homosexual), but did you know that there are many men and women who once identified as “gay” or “lesbian” who left that lifestyle and are now living happy lives free of homosexuality? I respect them and their choices; do you? Have you ever met a former homosexual or read one of their testimonies? If not, here’s a website for you to visit: www.exodus.to. (Keep in mind that homosexual activists like Wayne Besen (www.truthwinsout.org) relentlessly demean, ridicule and even harass former homosexuals and the whole idea of “ex-gays” — strange conduct from a group that demands tolerance and respect from others.)

We disagree on the morality of homosexual practice, it’s that simple. I don’t ask you to “respect” all my decisions and behaviors — or my arguments — but I do ask you to respect my freedom to live according to my conscience, in a nation founded on religious freedom. And though as a Christian I respect the dignity of all human beings (who are made in the image of God), I will never respect the choice to embrace homosexual/bi/trans behavior — any more so than I would respect people self-identifying by any other sexual sin. (Of course, there are no Adultery Pride Parades.)

That said, speaking as a sinner myself, I have no use for people who hate homosexuals — who need the hope and grace of the Gospel like everyone else. Rather, I would ask people practicing homosexuality to consider the possibility that they are wrong about this behavior (and their “gay” self-identity), and to be open to the possibility of leaving it through a relationship with Jesus Christ. (Of course, people can leave homosexuality and other sinful patterns without God, but I have found that the most satisfied ex-gays are those who have embraced Christ; see http://www.redeemedlives.org/index.asp, a ministry led by another ex-gay, Mario Bergner.)

So the gist of this debate is: do I and others like me have the right not to approve or subsidize behavior we consider immoral and changeable — or will that right be stripped from us in the name of “LGBT rights”? Should a small businessman, say an Orthodox Jew with 25 employees, be required by the state to subsidize the homosexual relationships of his employees against his will? You see, this is far different from traditional civil rights — based on unchangeable skin color — which perhaps explains why African Americans are the strongest sub-group in opposition to “same-sex marriage.”

Besides, the science isn’t in on the supposed “gay gene” so why do you assume it’s fact? (Check out the American Psychological Association’s recent retreat on the alleged innateness of homosexuality: http://www.washblade.com/2009/7-10/news/national/14849.cfm.)

Since you “care about freedom,” will you stand up strongly for the liberty of all Americans to live by their moral and religious beliefs, even if you don’t agree with or understand them? I hope so.

Thanks for taking the time to write, and sorry for the late reply. We get thousands of emails a month and many are not as respectful as yours.

Sincerely,

Peter LaBarbera
President
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
www.aftah.org

July 17, 2009

——————————————————————————–

Jeff’s Letter to AFTAH:

From: Jeff H. [mailto:--------]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:59 PM
To: americansfortruth@comcast.net
Subject: introduction

Hi,

I am a straight man, married for 30 years. As an entrepreneur and capitalist I have created thousands of jobs. I am no “left wing” radical.

About 5% of the people of the world are gay or lesbian, one out of twenty people. Just as you and I didn’t pick our sexuality, they didn’t pick theirs. Their “agenda” is the agenda of civil rights. It is also my agenda and the agenda of everyone who cares about freedom.

It would be great if you were to respect all humans regardless of what their genes are, and fight for human rights for everyone.

Thank you for your time.

- Jeff

Gagnon on “Hate Crimes” Bill S. 909 – Part I: It Promotes Hatred of People Opposed to Homosexual Behavior

Peterlab — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:15:41 +0000

Bill will be used to advance left-wing notion that defenders of normalcy are hateful bigots

Below we reprint the first of an excellent three-part series on the “Hate Crimes” bill (S. 909) by Pittsburgh Theological Seminary professor Robert Gagnon (left), probably the world’s foremost expert on the Bible and homosexuality from an orthodox (Bible-believing) perspective. S. 909 could be voted on as early as Thursday in the U.S. Senate. (So says the extremist National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.) For those who can’t wait on AFTAH for Parts II and III, go to this page on Gagnon’s website and scroll down for the full series.

TAKE ACTION: call or write your U.S. Senators (202-224-3121 or 202-225-1321; www.congress.org) today and urge them to oppose the “hate crimes” bill, which is likely to be tacked on as an amendment to the defense appropriations bill for a vote as early as Thursday. Federal “hate crimes” legislation including homosexuality and gender confusion will lay the groundwork for the persecution of religious Americans or anyone who acts on the belief that homosexuality is wrong — as well as pro-life activists working to save unborn babies and those who fight jihadist Islamo-fascism. Every red state with no “sexual orientation” laws will instantly be affected by this federal power-grab that guarantees unequal treatment in the law by awarding homosexuals, bisexuals and the gender confused specially protected “civil rights” status.

_____________________________

Gagnon writes:

Why a Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity “Hate Crimes” Law Is Bad for You

Part 1: Promoting hatred of people opposed to homosexual practice and transgenderism

by Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D.

May 28, 2009

To print a clean copy with proper formatting and pagination go to the pdf version HERE.

The so-called “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act” (H.R. 1913), passed by the U.S. House of Representatives along party lines on Apr. 29 and introduced into the U.S. Senate shortly thereafter by Ted Kennedy (S. 909), is improperly named. The bill is really a hate-promotion bill as regards the inclusion of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” among the groupings slated to receive special protection.

Supporters of this bill who rightly believe homosexual practice to be unnatural and sinful have been duped into thinking that this bill is primarily about protecting homosexual and transgendered persons from violence. They hear the rubric “hate crimes” and think: Who can be for violence toward homosexual and transgendered persons?

The real objectives of the “hate crimes” bill (hint: it’s not about crime)

Supporters of this bill who believe homosexual practice to be immoral rarely stop to consider that all necessary laws are already in place protecting everyone from violent physical attacks or verbal threats to do bodily harm, including persons who engage in homosexual and transgendered behavior. Even homosexual columnist Andrew Sullivan has recently commented: “The real reason for hate crime laws is not the defense of human beings from crime. There are already laws against that—and Matthew Shepard’s murderers were successfully prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in a state with no hate crimes law at the time.” There is absolutely no evidence that state prosecutors are systematically ignoring genuine crimes against homosexual and transgendered persons, once reported to law enforcement officials.

So why pass “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” so-called “hate crime” legislation? The reason has more to do with foisting an expansive homosexualist agenda on the nation than with concerns about crime. The bill serves the following vital aims of that agenda:

It gets the federal government to enshrine in federal law “sexual orientation” (i.e. homosexuality and bisexuality) and “gender identity” (i.e. transsexualism and cross-dressing) as identity markers worthy of special protection and promotion alongside racial and gender diversity.
This in turn gives federal backing to hatred of all persons who express opposition to homosexual practice and transgenderism as the moral equivalent of racists and misogynists (sexists), no matter how loving that expression of opposition may be.
It also lays the foundation for a litany of future “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” bills that will markedly abridge the civil liberties of all who express moral disapproval of homosexual practice and transgenderism.

The foot in the door

This “hate crimes” bill is the proverbial foot in the door or camel nose in the tent that makes possible —— indeed inevitable —— all future laws involving “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” By simply placing “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” alongside of “race,” “color,” “national origin,” “gender,” and “disability,” this “hate crimes” bill does most of its damage. It ensconces in federal law the principle that homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality are as benign as race, gender, and disability —— an aspect of human diversity that must be affirmed and celebrated. Those who refuse to go along with this principle then become encoded in law as hateful, discriminatory bigots.

Note that while “religion” (an identity marker involving choice) is one of the protected categories of this “hate crime” bill, the bill mainly makes a connection between “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” on the one hand and a host of benign innate conditions on the other (i.e., the five other protected categories of the bill). I’ve never heard an advocate for homosexual practice and transgenderism make the connection between these behaviors and religious belief. The analogy is always made with race and gender.

The thought crime of “prejudice” against homosexual and transgender behavior

Make no mistake about the fact that this is an Orwellian thought-crimes bill. Suppose a young man and a 70-year-old grandmother push each at roughly the same time. The man does so after shouting out “You bigoted homophobe!” while the grandmother does so after responding “Well then, you are a sexual pervert!”

This “hate crime” bill would apply only to the grandmother and would do so solely on the basis that she believed that homosexual practice was a perversion of the natural sexual order. For the bill establishes this conviction to be a “prejudice,” stating that the federal government can intervene when “a crime of violence … is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived … sexual orientation [or] gender identity … of the victim” (emphasis added). The bill effectively (but wrongly, go HERE) declares this conviction to be a hate that society must prosecute vigorously by enhancing penalties and calling for massive federal intervention.

However, the bill shows no concern for classifying as hateful prejudice the alternative conviction; namely, that advocates of a male-female requirement for sexual relations are hateful, ignorant bigots. Rather, the bill promotes this alternative conviction to society at large. It essentially declares to all sectors of society that it is “open season” on hating and ostracizing persons who find homosexual behavior and transsexualism to be morally repugnant, much as society hates and ostracizes members of the Klu Klux Klan or skinhead Nazi groups.

Recent cases in point are the widespread intimidation tactics employed by homosexualist opponents of California’s Proposition 8 against its supporters (for example, go HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE) and the smear campaign against Miss California, Carrie Prejean, for daring to disagree with a homosexual pageant judge’s affirmation of “gay marriage” (note that the point holds whatever Prejean’s deficiencies may be as a role model for Christian sexual modesty). Why shouldn’t those opposed to homosexual practice or transsexualism get special protection from the federal government? The reason is simple: They’re bigots.

The analogy of other sexual orientations

This bill thus goes beyond protection of homosexual, bisexual, and transgendered persons (who are already protected) to promotion of hatred —— hatred toward those opposed to homosexual and transgendered behavior. If you have any doubt about that, consider whether adding pedophilia (‘pedosexuality’) to the list would imply promotion of pedophilic behavior by the state and antagonism by the state toward perceived opponents of pedophiles. Surely it would.

Sadly, this may not be the best example since Rep. Steven King unsuccessfully introduced an amendment to the “hate crimes” bill in the House that would have excluded pedophilia from the definition of “sexual orientation.” If you can believe it, the Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee defeated the amendment along party lines, 13-10. To be sure, the Democrats are right that both “pedosexuality,” sexual desire for children, and “polysexuality,” sexual desire for more than one person concurrently, are “sexual orientations.” Where the Democrats err is in failing to recognize that this is a good reason for not having a “sexual orientation” provision.

Conclusion

So don’t fall for the line that, if you really love “gay,” lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons, you will support this “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” “hate crime” bill. No, support for this bill does not mean that you oppose hateful, violent acts against persons who self-identify as homosexuals, transsexuals, and cross-dressers. Existing laws already make that point. Rather, it means that you support stigmatizing, marginalizing, and penalizing people who, lovingly or not, oppose homosexual practice and transgenderism. This is a hate-promotion bill.

Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D. is associate professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (Abingdon Press) and co-author of Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views (Fortress Press). See www.robgagnon.net for more information.

WATCH IT: Video and Transcript of Obama’s White House Speech Celebrating ‘Gay Pride’ Month

Peterlab — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:54:15 +0000

Slams “worn arguments and old attitudes of those who believe homosexuality is wrong; “so-called” Defense of Marriage Act

To view the president’s elitist slap at Americans who oppose homosexuality as adhering to “worn arguments and old attitudes,” start watching at the 1:00 mark of the YouTube video below of the June 29th White House reception with homosexual activists celebrating “gay pride month” (read AFTAH’s reaction to the speech HERE):

The following is the official White House transcript of Obama’s “LGBT”(lesbian, gay, bisexual transgender) speech June 29 (emphasis added):

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release June 29, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT LGBT PRIDE MONTH RECEPTION

East Room

4:35 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Hello, hello, hello. (Applause.) Hey! Good to see you. (Applause.) I’m waiting for FLOTUS here. FLOTUS always politics more than POTUS.

MRS. OBAMA: No, you move too slow. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: It is great to see everybody here today and they’re just — I’ve got a lot of friends in the room, but there are some people I want to especially acknowledge. First of all, somebody who helped ensure that we are in the White House, Steve Hildebrand. Please give Steve a big round of applause. (Applause.) Where’s Steve? He’s around here somewhere. (Applause.)

The new chair of the Export-Import Bank, Fred Hochberg. (Applause.) Where’s Fred? There’s Fred. Good to see you, Fred. Our Director of the Institute of Education Sciences at DOE, John Easton. Where’s John? (Applause.) A couple of special friends — Bishop Gene Robinson. Where’s Gene? (Applause.) Hey, Gene. Ambassador Michael Guest is here. (Applause.) Ambassador Jim Hormel is here. (Applause.) Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown is here. (Applause.)

All of you are here. (Laughter and applause.) Welcome to your White House. (Applause.) So –

AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Inaudible.) (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Somebody asked from the Lincoln Bedroom here. (Laughter.) You knew I was from Chicago too. (Laughter.)

It’s good to see so many friends and familiar faces, and I deeply appreciate the support I’ve received from so many of you. Michelle appreciates it and I want you to know that you have our support, as well. (Applause.) And you have my thanks for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard and care about their communities — and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. (Applause.)

Now this struggle, I don’t need to tell you, is incredibly difficult, although I think it’s important to consider the extraordinary progress that we have made. There are unjust laws to overturn and unfair practices to stop. And though we’ve made progress, there are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; and who would deny you the rights that most Americans take for granted. And I know this is painful and I know it can be heartbreaking.

And yet all of you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make but also by the power of the example that you set in your own lives — as parents and friends, as PTA members and leaders in the community. And that’s important, and I’m glad that so many LGBT families could join us today. (Applause.) For we know that progress depends not only on changing laws but also changing hearts. And that real, transformative change never begins in Washington.

(Cell phone “quacks.”)

Whose duck is back there? (Laughter.)

MRS. OBAMA: It’s a duck.

THE PRESIDENT: There’s a duck quacking in there somewhere. (Laughter.) Where do you guys get these ring tones, by the way? (Laughter.) I’m just curious. (Laughter.)

Indeed, that’s the story of the movement for fairness and equality — not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who’ve been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship; who’ve been told that the full blessings and opportunities of this country were closed to them. It’s the story of progress sought by those who started off with little influence or power; by men and women who brought about change through quiet, personal acts of compassion and courage and sometimes defiance wherever and whenever they could.

That’s the story of a civil rights pioneer who’s here today, Frank Kameny, who was fired — (applause.) Frank was fired from his job as an astronomer for the federal government simply because he was gay. And in 1965, he led a protest outside the White House, which was at the time both an act of conscience but also an act of extraordinary courage. And so we are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership. (Applause.)

It’s the story of the Stonewall protests, which took place 40 years ago this week, when a group of citizens — with few options, and fewer supporters — decided they’d had enough and refused to accept a policy of wanton discrimination. And two men who were at those protests are here today. Imagine the journey that they’ve travelled.

It’s the story of an epidemic that decimated a community — and the gay men and women who came to support one another and save one another; and who continue to fight this scourge; and who demonstrated before the world that different kinds of families can show the same compassion and support in a time of need — that we all share the capacity to love.

So this story, this struggle, continues today — for even as we face extraordinary challenges as a nation, we cannot — and will not — put aside issues of basic equality. (Applause.) We seek an America in which no one feels the pain of discrimination based on who you are or who you love.

And I know that many in this room don’t believe that progress has come fast enough, and I understand that. It’s not for me to tell you to be patient, any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half century ago.

But I say this: We have made progress and we will make more. And I want you to know that I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I’ve made, but by the promises that my administration keeps. And by the time you receive — (applause.) We’ve been in office six months now. I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration. (Applause.)

Now, while there is much more work to do, we can point to important changes we’ve already put in place since coming into office. I’ve signed a memorandum requiring all agencies to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as current law allows. And these are benefits that will make a real difference for federal employees and Foreign Service Officers, who are so often treated as if their families don’t exist. And I’d like to note that one of the key voices in helping us develop this policy is John Berry, our director of the Office of Personnel Management, who is here today. And I want to thank John Berry. (Applause.)

I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination — (applause) — to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country. Now, I want to add we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides. And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law. I’ve made that clear.

I’m also urging Congress to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, which will guarantee the full range of benefits, including health care, to LGBT couples and their children. (Applause.) My administration is also working hard to pass an employee non-discrimination bill and hate crimes bill, and we’re making progress on both fronts. (Applause.) Judy and Dennis Shepard, as well as their son Logan, are here today. I met with Judy in the Oval Office in May — (applause) — and I assured her and I assured all of you that we are going to pass an inclusive hate crimes bill into law, a bill named for their son Matthew. (Applause.)

In addition, my administration is committed to rescinding the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status. (Applause.) The Office of Management and Budget just concluded a review of a proposal to repeal this entry ban, which is a first and very big step towards ending this policy. And we all know that HIV/AIDS continues to be a public health threat in many communities, including right here in the District of Columbia. And that’s why this past Saturday, on National HIV Testing Day, I was proud once again to encourage all Americans to know their status and get tested the way Michelle and I know our status and got tested. (Applause.)

And finally, I want to say a word about “don’t ask, don’t tell.” As I said before — I’ll say it again — I believe “don’t ask, don’t tell” doesn’t contribute to our national security. (Applause.) In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security. (Applause.)

Now, my administration is already working with the Pentagon and members of the House and the Senate on how we’ll go about ending this policy, which will require an act of Congress.

Someday, I’m confident, we’ll look back at this transition and ask why it generated such angst, but as Commander-in-Chief, in a time of war, I do have a responsibility to see that this change is administered in a practical way and a way that takes over the long term. That’s why I’ve asked the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a plan for how to thoroughly implement a repeal.

I know that every day that passes without a resolution is a deep disappointment to those men and women who continue to be discharged under this policy — patriots who often possess critical language skills and years of training and who’ve served this country well. But what I hope is that these cases underscore the urgency of reversing this policy not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because it is essential for our national security.

Now, even as we take these steps, we must recognize that real progress depends not only on the laws we change but, as I said before, on the hearts we open. For if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that there are good and decent people in this country who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters — not yet.

That’s why I’ve spoken about these issues not just in front of you, but in front of unlikely audiences — in front of African American church members, in front of other audiences that have traditionally resisted these changes. And that’s what I’ll continue to do so. That’s how we’ll shift attitudes. That’s how we’ll honor the legacy of leaders like Frank and many others who have refused to accept anything less than full and equal citizenship.

Now, 40 years ago, in the heart of New York City at a place called the Stonewall Inn, a group of citizens, including a few who are here today, as I said, defied an unjust policy and awakened a nascent movement.

It was the middle of the night. The police stormed the bar, which was known for being one of the few spots where it was safe to be gay in New York. Now, raids like this were entirely ordinary. Because it was considered obscene and illegal to be gay, no establishments for gays and lesbians could get licenses to operate. The nature of these businesses, combined with the vulnerability of the gay community itself, meant places like Stonewall, and the patrons inside, were often the victims of corruption and blackmail.

Now, ordinarily, the raid would come and the customers would disperse. But on this night, something was different. There are many accounts of what happened, and much has been lost to history, but what we do know is this: People didn’t leave. They stood their ground. And over the course of several nights they declared that they had seen enough injustice in their time. This was an outpouring against not just what they experienced that night, but what they had experienced their whole lives. And as with so many movements, it was also something more: It was at this defining moment that these folks who had been marginalized rose up to challenge not just how the world saw them, but also how they saw themselves.

As we’ve seen so many times in history, once that spirit takes hold there is little that can stand in its way. (Applause.) And the riots at Stonewall gave way to protests, and protests gave way to a movement, and the movement gave way to a transformation that continues to this day. It continues when a partner fights for her right to sit at the hospital bedside of a woman she loves. It continues when a teenager is called a name for being different and says, “So what if I am?” It continues in your work and in your activism, in your fight to freely live your lives to the fullest.

In one year after the protests, a few hundred gays and lesbians and their supporters gathered at the Stonewall Inn to lead a historic march for equality. But when they reached Central Park, the few hundred that began the march had swelled to 5,000. Something had changed, and it would never change back.

The truth is when these folks protested at Stonewall 40 years ago no one could have imagined that you — or, for that matter, I — (laughter) — would be standing here today. (Applause.) So we are all witnesses to monumental changes in this country. That should give us hope, but we cannot rest. We must continue to do our part to make progress — step by step, law by law, mind by changing mind. And I want you to know that in this task I will not only be your friend, I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a President who fights with you and for you.

Thanks very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.) Thank you. It’s a little stuffed in here. We’re going to open — we opened up that door. We’re going to walk this way, and then we’re going to come around and we’ll see some of you over there, all right? (Laughter.) But out there. (Laughter.)

But thank you very much, all, for being here. Enjoy the White House. Thank you. (Applause.)

END 4:53 P.M. EDT

AFTAH Warns of Obama’s Radical Homosexual Agenda as President Meets Today with Gay Activists

Peterlab — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:29:50 +0000

Obama Honors Anti-Christian Radical: The Administration’s OPM Director John Berry — an open homosexual and ardent “gay” activist (second from left in photo; click to enlarge) — apologized to and honored homosexual activist icon Frank Kameny (third from left). Kameny calls religious conservatives like AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera “Christianofascists” and says “gay is godly” — even though he is an atheist. President Obama’s agenda on homosexuality and transsexuality is as unknown to the public as it is radical. If he fulfills all of his promises to the self-styled “Queer” movement — including homosexualizing the U.S. military — the American people will be less free than we are today. Obama meets in the White today with homosexual and transsexual activists as part of his celebration of June as “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Trangender Pride Month.” At bottom is a larger photo of Kameny and Berry. Photos: Office of Personnel Management.

____________________________

TAKE ACTION: Call your U.S. Congressman and Senators and oppose “Hate Crimes” (S 909), ENDA (Employment Nondiscrimination Act) and all aspects of President Obama’s homosexual/transsexual agenda (see below). Call or write: 202-224-3121; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org.

____________________________

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
www.americansfortruth.com

June 29, 2009; Contact AFTAH at americansfortruth@comcast.net

AFTAH Warns of Obama’s Radical Homosexual Agenda as President Meets Today with Gay Activists

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) warns that President Obama will likely renew his radical promises to homosexual activists today at a White House “Pride Month” reception –– promises that, if fulfilled, will undermine the freedoms of the majority of Americans who affirm marriage and healthy, time-tested Judeo-Christian sexual values in their daily lives.

This afternoon, President Obama will meet with homosexual and transsexual activists at a “Reception for LGBT Pride Month.” AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera reminds voters that Obama has no mandate for his comprehensive “gay” agenda, since these agenda items were barely discussed in the general election campaign:

Obama’s commitment to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act –– which could force pro-traditional-marriage states to recognize out-of-state homosexual “marriages”;
Obama’s plans to homosexualize the U.S. military despite the plea of 1,100 high-ranking retired military officers not to overturn current law declaring homosexuality incompatible with military service;
Obama’s plans to create federal workplace “rights” based on transsexuality;
Obama’s Faith Advisory appointment of Harry Knox, who called the pope a “discredited leader” and homosexuality a “gift from God,” thus mocking holy Scripture;
Obama’s appointment of Kevin Jennings to head up “Safe Schools” at the Department of Education. As founder of Gay, Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN), Jennings presided over the 2000 “Fistgate” scandal in which a GLSEN-sponsored workshop exposed underage children to graphic discussions by homosexual adults on how to perform dangerous and bizarre gay perversions; Jennings also said “[F**k] ‘em” and “Drop dead” to religious conservatives in a 2000 speech [click HERE to read Scott Whiteman's shocking "Fistgate" affidavit];
Obama’s appointment of John Berry as Office of Personnel Management Director, strategically placed to advance homosexual activism throughout the federal government;
Obama’s agenda of federalizing pro-homosexual “hate crimes” and employment law (ENDA) –– which would undermine Americans’ freedoms and vastly increase the power of the state to punish moral-minded citizens by promoting homosexuality and gender confusion as official government policy;
Obama’s goal to homosexualize immigration laws, thus further undermining marriage and incentivizing the immigration of homosexuals –– adding new stress to an already burdened system;
The White House’s honoring of “gay pride” and radical, anti-Christian bigots like homosexual icon Frank Kameny –– who smears religious conservatives as “Christianofascists” –– and who cynically proclaims, despite being an atheist, that “gay is godly”; [Note: Kameny is also "Bestiality-tolerant"];
Obama’s promotion of homosexual adoption, which (for intentionally fatherless lesbian-led households), contradicts his commitment to responsible fatherhood.

Homosexual activist icon Frank Kameny (left) with Obama’s homosexual director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), John Berry.

Open Homosexuals in the Military: Bad Idea Then, Bad Idea Now

Peterlab — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:29:37 +0000

Obama’s vow to “outlaw discrimination” would criminalize traditional morality in the Armed Forces

The column by Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs at the Liberty Counsel and a Board Member of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, first appeared in WorldNetDaily. Barber will be the keynote speaker at AFTAH’s fund-raising banquet on Saturday, October 24:

________________________________

WorldNetDaily, Friday, June 26, 2009

By Matt Barber

Most are unaware that during the Revolutionary War George Washington was a staunch advocate for allowing “gays” in the military. In fact, he boldly commissioned the little-known “Fabulous Pink Brigade,” which once infiltrated a British camp and –– while the redcoats slept –– covertly redecorated in eye-popping pastels.

No, although Washington was a revolutionary, he wasn’t a radical. The idea of open homosexuality within our armed services has long been considered preposterous.

Washington wisely understood that to allow men among the ranks who sodomized other men would necessarily distract from the mission at hand, disrupt unit cohesion and damage the morale of non-sodomy-disposed soldiers forced to sleep and bathe alongside those so inclined. It’s understandably disquieting to wonder whether your foxhole buddy “has your back” or wants to rub it.

In general court-martial orders dated March 14, 1778, Washington, through his designs, addressed the disposition of a homosexual soldier “tried for attempting to commit sodomy”: “[We] do sentence him to be dismiss’d [from] the service with infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with abhorrence and detestation of such infamous crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of camp tomorrow morning by all the drummers and fifers in the Army never to return.”

Barack Obama is no George Washington. He and a like-minded gaggle of congressional liberals have pledged to repeal the federal law, Section 654, Title 10, which stipulates that homosexual practice is incompatible with military service. Furthermore, they intend to do away with Bill Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” administrative compromise.

The president has asked Congress to pass and send to his desk H.R. 1283, which, for the first time in American history, would homosexualize the military. To wit, he seeks to supplant military vitality with San Francisco vice. Whereas George Washington put a premium on combat readiness and national security, these indispensable safeguards play last fiddle to liberals’ obtuse fixation with political correctness.

In the deadly game of war it’s dangerously irresponsible to place extreme social ideology above national security. In combat, even the slightest disruption or distraction can spell the difference between victory and defeat –– life and death. The left fails to understand this grave reality.

The boots on the ground do not. In a March 31, 2009, letter addressed to President Obama and members of Congress, over 1,l00 of the military’s highest ranking and most distinguished commanders warned that they were “greatly concerned” by movement toward military homosexualization. They expressed fear that a DADT repeal would “eventually break the All-Volunteer Force.”

It seems their fears are justified. A 2009 Military Times poll determined that nearly one in 10 of those currently serving would not re-enlist if the policy were repealed. In today’s highly perilous global political climate, such a plummet in service could be devastating to national security.

I’m speaking from personal experience. I served 12 years in the Army National Guard. During basic training a young man who later turned out to be homosexual was discharged after making unwanted advances toward other soldiers and for inappropriately touching several while they slept in the barracks.

A lengthy investigation ensued. Troops were pulled away from their regular training to answer questions. It was a tremendous distraction for our entire platoon. This incident most definitely disrupted unit cohesion and harmed troop morale.

But none of this matters to liberals. Obama is the un-Washington. The left –– of which Obama sits on the fringe –– loathe the armed services. Rather than viewing the military as a noble and necessary institution designed as our last line of defense, they consider it a giant petri dish ripe for radical social experimentation. Move over Army National Guard; make way for the smarmy avant-garde.

But it’s not just the military that Obama seeks to “remake”; it’s the entire social construct. On June 1, 2009, he unilaterally and arbitrarily issued an official Presidential Proclamation smugly declaring that all Americans should celebrate sexual deviancy. He dubbed June “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.”

Rather than regarding homosexual practice with “abhorrence” and “detestation” –– as did George Washington and most everyone until recent years –– Obama has euphemistically vowed to “outlaw discrimination” (read: criminalize traditional morality). Included within his proclamation –– and among a host of equally radical social pledges –– was yet another promise to “[end] the existing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. …”

Well, in recent weeks the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected the notion that DADT constitutes “discrimination.” It affirmed a lower court ruling which held that the policy is “rationally related to the government’s legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion.”

In an age of rampant judicial activism, it’s refreshing to witness some common-sense judicial restraint. This decision by the Supreme Court should once again remind everyone that, contrary to the propaganda fomented by the organized homosexual lobby, Barack Obama and liberals in Congress, homosexual temptation and the destructive but changeable homosexual lifestyle must not be confused with neutral and immutable characteristics such as race or gender for purposes of assigning special government minority status.

That is to say, it’s properly illegal, for instance, to ban African-Americans from serving in the armed forces. It is neither illegal nor discriminatory, however, to disallow an African-American who “loudly and proudly” opts to practice what George Washington would have called “the sin that dare not speak its name.”

Hands off the military, Mr. Obama; we can’t afford the “progress.”

Matt Barber (jmattbarber@comcast.net) is Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action. (This information is provided for identification purposes only.)

AFTAH Press Conference: Obama’s Appointments and Policies Reflect Extreme Homosexual Agenda

Peterlab — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:32:09 +0000

HATE CRIMES ALERT: FoxNews and the “gay” press are reporting that the Senate could vote today or tomorrow on “Hate Crimes” legislation. It reportedly will be attached to an innocuous bill, S. 1023, the Travel Promotion Act. Please call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121 (www.congress.org) and urge them not to pass “Hate Crimes” legislation, which would create unequal protection and federalize “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” (transsexual “rights”) in the law. After “hate crimes” laws invariably come “hate speech” laws (e.g., in Canada and Great Britain), so this bill represents a grave threat to our First Amendment liberties. Please forward this e-mail on to your network. — Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.com

_____________________________________

Media Advisory

Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

June 16, 2009; Contact: Angela at 847-722-5330; americansfortruth@comcast.net

Coalition Press Conference: Obama’s Appointments and Policies Reflect Extreme Homosexual Agenda

CHICAGO, Ill. – Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) is organizing a news conference Wednesday, June 17th at 11:00 AM, to highlight President Obama’s radical homosexual appointments and overall “gay” agenda:

Where: 29 South LaSalle Street, Suite 610, Chicago, IL
When: Wednesday., June 17, 11:00 AM
Who: Scheduled speakers:

Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel;
Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern (R);
Hiram Crawford, pro-family, pro-life advocate, Chicago;
Mary Ann Hackett, Catholic Citizens of Illinois;
Diane Gramley, American Family Association of Pennsylvania;
David Smith, Illinois Family Institute;
Pastor Larry Rogers, Israel Methodist Community Church, Chicago;
Tom Brejcha, Thomas More Pro-Life Law Center;
Pastor Calvin Lindstrom, Church of Christian Liberty, Arlington Heights, IL

What: press event drawing attention to Obama’s emerging homosexual- and transsexual activist agenda:

Obama’s radical appointments including anti-traditional-Catholic Harry Knox (of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign) and Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) founder Kevin Jennings;

Hate Crimes bill;

Obama’s radical promise to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), signed into law by President Clinton in 1996);

Obama’s ENDA (Employment Nondiscrimination Act) plans to force businesses to approve of homosexuality;

Obama’s plan to homosexualize the U.S. military (repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”);

Obama’s confusion about Christianity, the Bible and homosexual practice;

Obama’s lack of mandate to push the envelope on homosexual and transsexual issues

“Americans are largely ignorant about President Obama’s extreme pro-homosexual goals, which includes repealing DOMA and homosexualizing the U.S. military,” said AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera. “We are thrilled that these organizations and leaders are coming together to expose Obama’s ‘gay’ and transsexual agenda –– for which he has zero mandate because these issues were almost completely ignored in the general election campaign.”

Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel attorney and AFTAH board member, said: “By pledging his support for every demand of extremist homosexual pressure groups, President Obama has revealed himself to be out of step with those he serves. For example, he has promised to homosexualize the military supplanting sound judgment with San Francisco vice. It’s dangerously irresponsible for the President to place political correctness above national security. Now is not the time for sexual revolution in this nation. Now is the time to return to the family values that made America great.”
_________________________________________

Americans For Truth Needs You! … Give $25 and Get a Free Book

We need your financial help and prayers to keep fighting the powerful “queer” lobby. If you will help Americans For Truth with a tax-deductible gift of $25 or more, we will send you a free copy of the hard-cover book Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far, by the late Dr. Charles Socarides, who dedicated his life to understanding homosexuality and helping people overcome it. Will you consider a gift of $25, $100, $500 or even $1,000 or more to help Americans For Truth fight the powerful, well-financed Homosexual Lobby? You can make your gift online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate, or mail your gift to: Americans For Truth, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.

AFTAH to Protest Obama Speech in Chicago, Says President Has No Mandate to Push Radical Homosexual Agenda

Peterlab — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:50:36 +0000

Does America Share Obama’s “Gay Pride”? President Obama is in a bind: he promised homosexual activists almost everything they wanted, yet homosexuality was virtually a non-issue in the general election campaign. Thus Obama has no mandate for his radical homosexual-agenda goals such as repealing the Defense of Marriage Act — signed into law by Bill Clinton – and homosexualizing the U.S. military (repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”). At left is the “gay” version of Obama’s famous campaign logo, complete with the homosexual “rainbow flag.” TAKE ACTION: call your Congressman and Senators (202-224-3121/202-225-3121), and President Obama (202-456-1414) and urge them not to force immoral pro-homosexuality policies on the American people, especially our men and women serving in the military.

____________________________

Press Release, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

AFTAH to Protest Obama Speech in Chicago, Says President Has No Mandate to Push Radical Homosexual Agenda

June 15, 2009; contact: Angela: 847-722-5330

CHICAGO, Illinois – Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) will be protesting President Obama during his speech here today, with the message that Obama has no mandate from the election to advance the radical, pro-homosexual agenda that his “gay” and transsexual activist allies are demanding of him.

AFTAH will be present Monday morning at the Hyatt Regency Chicago (151 E. Wacker Dr.) as Obama delivers a speech to the American Medical Association –– with a banner proclaiming: “Barack Obama: “Radically Pro-Abortion. Radically Pro-Homosexual.” Americans For Truth is also organizing a Chicago press conference Wednesday, June 17, featuring national pro-family leaders speaking out against Obama’s bigoted “gay” activist political appointments and his wider GLBT agenda.

AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera issued the following statement Monday on Obama’s pro-homosexuality appointments and policies, even as self-styled “queer” activists gripe that he is not moving ahead fast enough on their shared agenda:

“President Obama has as much of a mandate for his radical homosexual agenda –– which includes repealing the popular Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and homosexualizing the U.S. military –– as he does for implementing his campaign promise of enacting the extreme ‘Freedom of Choice Act’ (FOCA), which would eviscerate pro-life reform laws nationwide.

“Obama is in a bind. His homosexual supporters are calling for quicker action on their GLBT agenda, but if he satisfies their demands he risks appearing as the far-left liberal he is rather than the moderate he claimed to be in the campaign. Few Obama voters are aware of his reckless promise to the Homosexual Lobby to help repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) –– which was signed into law in 1996 by President Clinton with wide Democratic support. (DOMA protects states from being forced to recognize the same-sex “marriages” from other states like Massachusetts.)

“Nor is it common knowledge that Obama pledged to end ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ in military –– despite a survey showing that a majority of servicemen oppose such a change and many would not re-enlist if open homosexuality were allowed.

“Lastly, while Obama boasts in his official Gay Pride Month proclamation of his ‘openly LGBT’ appointments, two of those appointees have touched off deep resentment in the faith community. Catholic leaders are demanding the replacement of homosexual activist Harry Knox on Obama’s Faith Advisory Council due to Knox’s bigoted comments against the pope and the Catholic Church. (Knox called Pope Benedict a “discredited leader” and the Knights of Columbus his “foot soldiers” in a “discredited army of oppression.” Turning the Bible upside-down, Knox describes his homosexuality is an “unchangeable gift from God, one for which I am very grateful.”)

“And pro-family leaders are urging Obama to withdraw the appointment of Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), as Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Education Department’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools. Jennings has a history of anti-Christian bigotry –– he once said ‘[F**k] ‘em’ and ‘Drop dead!’ to the ‘religious right’ during a speech in a church –– and GLSEN has repeatedly exposed youth to dangerous adult homosexual practices.

“Putting Kevin Jennings in charge of ‘Safe Schools’ is like appointing David Duke to head up a federal panel on Racial Reconciliation. Jennings and Knox must go.”

Senate “Hate Crimes” Bill Proponents Settle on Amendment Strategy to Avoid Filibuster

Peterlab — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:38:44 +0000

Folks, this article from the homosexual Washington Blade newspaper is a must-read. Note that pro-homosexual strategists in Washington fear a filibuster of a “stand alone” version of the bill. We’ve included the key portions below. TAKE ACTION: the anti-Christian homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign is pushing hard to get “Hate Crimes” passed. Call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 and urge them to oppose S. 909 or any “Hate Crimes” legislation — as an amendment or a stand-alone bill. For more on the dangers of Orwellian “Thought Crimes” laws, go HERE, HERE and a legal analysis of the House version of S. 909 HERE.
____________________________

Excerpted from the Washington Blade:

Senate to pass hate crimes bill as amendment
HRC calls for vote before summer’s end

By CHRIS JOHNSON, Washington Blade | Jun 8 2009

Senate leadership has decided to pass hate crimes legislation as an amendment to another bill instead of a standalone piece of legislation, according to the Human Rights Campaign.

Trevor Thomas, an HRC spokesperson, told the Blade in a statement Monday that the Senate settled on this method of passage.

“We understand that Senate leadership does not believe a hearing or mark up on the bill is necessary and plans to bring it directly to the floor as an amendment to another moving vehicle,” he said.

The bill passed the House on April 29, 249-175, as a standalone measure. The legislation would allow the U.S. Justice Department to assist in the prosecution of hate crimes committed against LGBT people that result in death or serious injury.

The Blade reported last month that the Senate was debating whether to pass hate crimes legislation as an amendment or as a standalone bill.

Thomas said the Senate determined it would pass the legislation as an amendment because the chamber’s leaders believes that’s “the most efficient way” to send the measure to the president’s desk.

Jim Manley, a spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), said he couldn’t confirm whether the Senate had decided to pass hate crimes legislation as an amendment, but he noted that’s how the Senate passed the legislation in previous sessions….

A Democratic aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the Senate has planned to pass hate crimes legislation as an amendment for some time. He noted that a standalone bill would be open to amendments and the Senate amendment process is much more open than the House’s.

The aide said it was not yet clear what bill the hate crimes legislation would join and that a viable option might not be available before late summer or early fall.

Thomas said HRC was calling on the Senate to pass the legislation before the end of the summer….

HRC is pushing every day for the amendment to come to the floor and believes there’s enough support in Congress to pass the measure as an amendment, Thomas said….

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the longest-serving openly gay member of Congress, said in an interview with the Blade in May that supporters of hate crimes legislation in the Senate were considering attaching the measure as an amendment to the 2010 defense authorization bill, but House lawmakers were trying to convince the Senate to pass the legislation in another way.

Frank told the Blade on Monday that said he understands the danger of a filibuster in the Senate with a standalone bill and said he’s fine with passing the legislation as an amendment — so long as the amended bill doesn’t deal with defense.

“You get kind of cognitive dissonance where you put [a] liberal amendment on a conservative bill or vice-versa, and you have problems,” he said. “It’s basically a liberal amendment. It shouldn’t go on a conservative bill.”

Forget Marriage in June – for Obama, It’s ‘Gay’ Pride Month

Peterlab — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:54:41 +0000

“No president, even Bill Clinton, has issued such a radical embrace of the entire homosexual agenda,” says Knight

Candidate Barack Obama had a special logo for homosexual and transsexual “pride.” No wonder “queer” activists have high expectations for him to carry forward their agenda as President.

___________________

By Robert Knight – Guest Columnist for OneNewsNow [to sign up for OneNews Now's Daily News Brief, go HERE] – 6/9/2009

For the first time in history, a U.S. president has issued a White House proclamation celebrating transgenderism — along with homosexuality, lesbianism, and bisexuality.

In his June 1 “Pride Month” proclamation, Barack Obama boasted of appointing Senate-confirmed openly homosexual nominees to high executive offices, described reluctance to accept homosexuality as “discrimination and prejudice,” and called for passage of the entire homosexual political agenda, including programs for “LGBT youth.”

No president, even Bill Clinton, has issued such a radical embrace of the entire homosexual agenda. To give “teeth” to the LGBT youth emphasis, President Obama recently appointed Kevin Jennings, the founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, as the Assistant Secretary of Education for Safe and Drug Free Schools. [See AFTAH articles on Jennings HERE and HERE (his "[F--k] ‘em quotation on the “religious right”).] Jennings’ group backs homosexual lessons for children, beginning in kindergarten, and sponsored a Massachusetts conference in 2000 in which children as young as 12 were instructed graphically about how to perform homosexual acts.

The president’s proclamation calls for:

“Outlawing discrimination in the workplace,” which means passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would empower the federal government to force employers with 15 or more employees to adopt “sexual orientation” special protections now applicable to race, ethnicity, and sex.
“Enhancing hate crime laws.” The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 909), now in the Senate, would lay the foundation for special treatment based on gender identity and homosexuality and would empower the Justice Department to take over any criminal case that it deems a “hate crime.” Similar laws paved the way for “thought crime” statutes in Canada, Sweden, England and other nations where public criticism of homosexuality is now banned and passages in the Bible have been declared “hate speech.”
Adoption of children by homosexual couples, guaranteeing that orphans would be placed in fatherless or motherless families by design, despite the availability of more than one million husband-and-wife households awaiting adoption.
Recognition of transsexuals and transvestites as a civil rights category on a par with race, ethnicity, place of birth, or sex. This means that men who dress as women would obtain more rights under the law than other Americans and could force employers to accommodate them, regardless of the impact on the workplace. A male school bus driver in Pennsylvania, for instance, showed up for work dressed as a woman and claimed that he had the right under a state law to do so, regardless of the impact on the children.
Civil unions. The president specifically called for civil unions, which give the rights and privileges of marriage to same-sex couples. Civil unions put the government on record as encouraging homosexuality with legal incentives. The proclamation did not mention the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), but Obama has called elsewhere for repealing it.
End the military’s ban on homosexual behavior. Despite a letter signed by more than 1,000 retired generals and admirals opposing this idea, Obama says he wants open homosexuals to serve in the nation’s armed forces.

When traditional sexual morality is redefined as “discrimination and prejudice,” the law will be used to criminalize biblical Christianity. Children will be taught in schools that God’s plan for marriage and sexuality is merely a form of bigotry and that “trying out” homosexuality will be a rite of passage. The volunteer military will be shaken to its roots, putting recruitment and retention at risk.

The stakes are enormous for our churches, our nation, our children and grandchildren.

Speak now — or forget about having peace in the future.

‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ Upheld

Peterlab — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 00:36:42 +0000

Note: Matt Barber is a Board Member of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH).
He will be the keynote speaker at AFTAH’s fundraising banquet in Arlington Heights, Illinois (outside Chicago) on Saturday, Oct. 24th.

TAKE ACTION: call or write your U.S. Representative and Senators and urge them to oppose all efforts to homosexualize the United States Armed Forces. Call 202-225-3121 or 202-224-3121 or go to www.congress.org.

Contact: jmattbarber@comcast.net

DATE: June 8, 2009

Lynchburg, VA – Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action issued the following statement today on news that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the military’s prohibition against homosexual conduct within the ranks of the armed forces. The high court refused an appeal from former Army Captain James Pietrangelo II, who was discharged after his superiors learned that he self-identified as “gay”:

“This is a military victory of a different sort,” said Barber. “Today our armed forces triumphed over the enemy of moral relativism; an enemy that seeks to replace military wisdom with San Francisco vice. This is a victory for our fighting young men and women and for the nation.

“The military is no place for such radical social experimentation; especially during a time of war. As polls continue to prove, the vast majority of military leaders and personnel agree. It has long been established that to enlist those who define themselves as ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ would both disrupt unit cohesion and harm troop morale.

“In an age of rampant judicial activism it’s refreshing to witness some commonsense judicial restraint. This decision by the Supreme Court should once again remind everyone that, contrary to the propaganda fomented by the organized homosexual lobby, homosexual temptation and the destructive but changeable homosexual lifestyle must not be confused with neutral and immutable characteristics such as race or gender for purposes of assigning special government minority status or protections.

“It is properly illegal, for instance, to ban African-Americans from serving in the armed forces. It is neither illegal nor discriminatory, however, to disallow an African-American who ‘loudly and proudly’ chooses to engage in distractive, destructive and deviant sexual behaviors. Today’s decision hammers home that reality.

“I’m speaking from personal experience,” continued Barber. “I served twelve years in the Army National Guard. During basic training a young man who later turned out to be homosexual was discharged after making unwanted advances toward other soldiers and for inappropriately touching several while they slept in the barracks.

“A lengthy investigation ensued. Troops were pulled away from their regular training to answer questions. It was a tremendous distraction for our entire platoon. This incident most definitely disrupted unit cohesion and harmed troop morale.

“Still, although today’s news is good news, the battle is far from over. For the good of the country and in the interest of national security, President Obama should heed the wisdom of the high court and our military leadership. He should cease his ill-advised efforts to force the military to implicitly sanction sexual deviancy by allowing it to occur. He should leave Don’t Ask Don’t Tell alone.”