The following is a Fair Foundation chart from 2008 on the huge disparity in NIH spending per death between HIV/AIDS and other diseases:

Special to Americas For Truth About Homosexuality

Editor’s Note: each of the cases Ms. Melton describes were identified by physicians as homosexual males for the medical transcriptions for which she was responsible.

By Lara Melton†

In my 20-plus years typing acute care medical records, at times I have almost ceased to be shocked at what I see. At other times, I continue to be shocked. For those who don’t know what a medical transcriptionist does: Every patient who is admitted to a hospital, seen in an emergency department, or seen by a doctor in a clinic, has a medical chart with the summary of each visit dictated by a physician and transcribed by a medical transcriptionist.

The hospital records consist of documentation which includes a history and physical examination summarizing the patient’s chief complaint, history of the present illness, past medical history, family history, social history, review of systems (what the patient has complaints about throughout their whole body from head to toe not necessarily related to the chief complaint), physical examination (what the doctor’s own findings are on a head to toe exam),  laboratory work; the doctor’s impression or diagnosis that he/she determines from the data gathered and his/her plan or recommendation.

Similarly, there are consultations, operative reports (transcription of the surgical procedure), discharge summaries describing the patient’s hospital course and condition on discharge, psychiatric reports, emergency department reports, radiology reports and a myriad of diagnostic and lab procedures that are transcribed. With that history, you can imagine what truths medical transcriptionists are exposed to.

What disturbs me most is the extreme disconnect between what you hear and see in media and in movies, and what children are taught in schools, and what real-life, indisputable medical reports prove.  For purposes of this article, we’ll deal with the horrifying physical and emotional maladies and domestic abuse that takes place amongst practicing homosexuals. These patients are seen in all aspects of hospital care including emergency rooms, mental health units, rehabilitation (Physical Therapy/Occupational Therapy[PT/OT]) units, surgery and clinics.

Because of privacy issues, I cannot cite the specific contents of the actual medical reports I have transcribed – but the following are some general examples of what they reveal [Editor’s note: AFTAH has added web links giving further information about these maladies]:

• Gay-on-Gay Assaults are at the hands of their same-sex domestic partners (not “hate crimes”) and are repetitive. (Reading details of the beatings is highly disturbing.);
• Besides the many patients with HIV/AIDS, extremely common conditions are patients with penile lesions, testicle swelling and epididymitis*, anal warts, anal lesions, anal tearing, anal scarring, perirectal fistulas, external hemorrhoids with recurrent bleeding and anal abscesses, requiring surgeries such as colectomy, colostomy and colorectal surgery.
• Some have rectal cancer (anal cancer). [See Cancer.org; UCSF;
• Many have substance abuse problems and the resultant psychiatric disorders, depression, suicidality.
• Anal Laxity: From my work I have learned that repeated sodomy (or anal sex) results in a condition called anal laxity (looseness) that requires surgery or a colostomy bag in order for the bowels to function properly.

When I learn of these types of conditions while typing reports of young and otherwise healthy teenaged patients, it is especially heartbreaking.

The questions that continue to run through my mind each time I type one of these situations arising from homosexuality are: “How can this be an act of love between two people?” and “Why are those who speak out against this damaging behavior vilified as intolerant haters?” — and my unanswered question is: “What type of person does this to another person?”

*Epididymitis is inflammation of the tube behind the testicles that carries sperm and is most often caused by a bacterial infection or by a sexually transmitted disease such as gonorrhea or Chlamydia. The following is from the Palm Springs Gay Men’s Health website:

Epididymitis is an infection of the epididymis, the coiled mass of tubes over the testicles where sperm mature before being ejaculated through the urethra. It can come from various infections of the prostate or urethra and so is often sexually transmitted. Epididymitis affects gay men at a much higher rate than straight men most likely because of increased incidence of STDs that affect the urethra as well as unprotected anal sex among many gay men. Feces in the anal canal are the source of E. coli (Escherichia coli) bacteria that can also cause epididymitis.

______________________________

†Lara Melton is a pseudonym of a medical transcriptionist living in the western United States.

_______________________________________________

Contact AFTAH: americansfortruth@gmail.com

With their new escalation of promoting homosexual behavior to other nations through U.S. foreign policy, President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have raised America’s defiance toward her Creator to a new level — while needlessly alienating nations less morally compromised than our own.  Not content to keep our decadence between our shores, the United States – through aggressively pro-“gay” Democratic administrations – now demands that other countries sink to our level by embracing homosexuality as a “human right.”

Who knew that when President Ronald Reagan spoke idealistically about America becoming a “shining city on the hill,” that city would turn out to be Sodom?  Hillary earned plaudits from the Left with her U.N. speech on international “gay rights,” but her words were an affront to our Declaration of Independence, which appeals to “Nature and Nature’s God.”

By redefining “human rights” to include the normalization of same-sex behaviors and gender confusion, Obama and Clinton have turned God’s natural moral order on its head.  There are many countries – including Muslim-dominated nations and major powers like Russia – that reject homosexuality.  By pushing sexual deviance on these nations, we only confirm their perception of America as a corrupt and declining – and very arrogant — superpower.

America, rooted in the Bible, historically embraced anti-sodomy laws, but now we are in the grip of an unprecedented moral and spiritual crisis that blackens our reputation worldwide.  As one Muslim tweeted in reaction to Obama’s international “gay rights” plan: “There is a great divide between the Founding Fathers and the pro-gay regime ruling America [today].”

Aberrant sexuality is not a fundamental liberty, and defending morality is not hateful “bigotry.”  Hillary claims, “Being gay is not a Western invention, it is a human reality.”  But homosexuality is about changeable behavior – not intrinsic, innate identity – as evidenced by countless men and women who now live happy lives apart from homosexuality, despite once considering themselves “gay” or “lesbian.”

Homosexuality – once widely regarded as a Crime Against Nature — is no more a “fundamental human right” than any other sexual sin.  Moreover, its practice is linked disproportionately to sexual diseases like HIV, anal cancer, hepatitis, gonorrhea and syphilis.  Culturally and politically speaking, what makes this perversion unique is that it has a powerful and well-funded (“gay”) movement behind it.  (There are no “Adultery Pride Parades” or “Porn-Users Pride Months.”)  However, that does not make it right.  All Americans who love God and respect His wonderful design for mankind should be ashamed of Obama’s and Hillary’s campaign to force a deeply flawed sexual ideology on innocent nations that do NOT want to emulate American decadence.

___________________________________________

YouTube of Sec. of State Hillary Clinton’s Dec. 6, 2011 UN address:

_______________________________________________

Obama offers plan for U.S. to be global LGBT sex cop

Wants to import homosexuals with special asylum privileges

Posted: December 07, 2011
8:28 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND

The Obama administration has announced it intends to make the United States the global sex cop, with plans to try to intervene in the workings of other nations where homosexuality is not promoted as well as plans to create special provisions for homosexuals and those with other lifestyle choices to gain special admittance to the U.S.

Read more: Obama offers plan for U.S. to be global LGBT sex cophttp://www.wnd.com/?pageId=375277#ixzz1fz5p4Y2q

AFTAH has launched a “Keep the Gay Blood Ban” campaign to oppose the renewed Homosexual Lobby push to end the FDA ban on “men who have had sex with men” giving blood. Cliff Kincaid discusses the extraordinary health risks associated with gay male sex.

The following is excerpted from a presentation by Cliff Kincaid [click HERE to listen; see listening instructions below] at the debut Americans For Truth Academy in August 2010. Kincaid discusses the risks of opening up the blood supply to men practicing homosexuality. The talk by Kincaid — Director of Accuracy in Media’s Center for Investigative Journalism and founder of America’s Survival – is titled, “The Battle over Blood: Gay Health Risks and Public Policy.” He focuses on the homosexual-related health threats to our military and spoke before the law was changed to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military. AFTAH Radio Hour replayed this excerpted speech August 6, 2011.

Order Truth Academy Sets: DVDs of Chicago 2010 or CDs of Columbus 2011 – A DVD-video set of the entire three-day Truth Academy is available for $89 (including postage). Other speakers include: Rena Lindevaldsen, Robert Knight, Matt Barber, Greg Quinlan, Ryan Sorba, Laurie Higgins, Robert Gagnon, Arthur Goldberg and AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera.  Columbus 2011: A CD-audio set of this year’s two-day Truth Academy in Columbus, OH — co-sponsored by Mission America – is also available, for $49 postpaid; speakers include: Lindevaldsen, Quinlan, Barber, Linda Harvey, Gary Glenn, Gagnon, LaBarbera and David Kupelian. Order BOTH Truth Academy sets (the Chicago DVD and the Columbus CD) for a discount price of $129. Send your check and specify your order to AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522; or give online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/ (please use PayPal if possible).

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes.  Do not use Real Player. It is not supported and there may be difficulty when listening with it.  Left click once on the link below to play. (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment or two to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.

8-6-11, Cliff Kincaid

[WARNING: OFFENSIVE AND GRAPHIC CONTENT; NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN]

ORIGINAL PAGE: Above is how the GLSEN "Gay-Straight Alliances" Facebook page appeared as of the afternoon of April 11, 2011 -- before Mission America exposed its pornographic links. Note the three photos for "NEXGAY" -- a pornographic homosexual male hook-up website -- and the photo for "Gay Trip Thailand," a sex-tourism Facebook page. Also, the photo for "Blueprint," a movie about homosexual male lovers distributed by TLA, a "gay" video company that sells homosexual porn videos.

TAKE ACTION: Parents and Guardians: Call your children’s middle or high school and ask if students and/or teachers will be permitted to refuse to speak during class on Friday, April 15 (as part of the annual homosexual activist “Day of Silence”). For more information, go HERE.

_______________________________________________________

By Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

A Facebook page affiliated with the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) — to support homosexual student clubs and GLSEN’s upcoming activist “Day of Silence” in schools nationwide (Friday, April 15) — was linked for several weeks to a pornographic “gay” hook-up website containing full-frontal nudity and personal ads expressing interest in dangerous homosexual practices including anal sodomy, “rimming” and various sadistic sex fetiishes popular in the homosexual male subculture.

The GLSEN ”Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook page was also linked to a  “Gay Trip Thailand” Facebook page with shirtless Thai males — luring men to that notorious sex-tourism destination — as well as a movie about two male lovers that is sponsored by a leading “gay” pornographic video distributor. When the salacious links were exposed April 11 by Mission America, a pro-family group, they were quickly removed from the GLSEN Facebook page.

The pornographic links evidently remained posted on the GLSEN-sponsored Facebook page for weeks. At least one ”photo” ad for the homosexual male hook-up site “NEXGAY” had been posted on the GLSEN Facebook page since at least January 15, 2011, based on a favorable comment  responding to the ad and posted on the GLSEN site that date.  (See  four NEXGAY photo-ads with male models in the lower right corner of the graphic at right.)

NEXGAY profile asks users to indicate their favored anal-sex "Role": choices range from "Bottom/Passive" to "Versatile" to "Top/Active." Homosexual anal sex is a huge risk factor in the continuing high rates of HIV and other STDs among "men who have sex with men." Click to enlarge graphic.

A perusal of the ”NEXGAY” website reveals it as one of many homosexual male “dating” sites — which are not like the typical heterosexual dating sites in that they are filled with vulgar and overtly pornographic references to sex acts, penis size, etc.

In fact, in its profile page where new members give their personal information, NEXGAY asks users to state their “penis size” –offering a pull-down menu with length options ranging from 5 to 27 centimeters; see photo below). Another entry asks whether they prefer ”escorts” (male prostitutes). The hyper-promiscous and often raunchy homosexual male hook-up culture — which includes anonymous sex — is fueled by efficient, online “gay” websites like Manhunt and Grindr — and now ”NEXGAY.”

As can be seen from our screen-shot upper right, a click on the NEXGAY photo on GLSEN’s “Gay Straight Alliances” Facebook page advertised it to their youthful audience as a site offering ”free, unrestricted online dating for gay men.” Yet on the front page of the NEXGAY site, as of today (April 12, 2010), it becomes clear what “unrestricted” means: among a series of thumbnail photos linking to NEXGAY subscribers is one for ”Charly” (see below left), showing him thrusting forward his exposed, erect penis (his face is not shown).

A click on “Charly’s” (from Hammond, Ind.) pornographic thumbnail photo takes the user to his profile page, which describes his “sexual interests” as:  “Anal, Bi/Straight, Bondage, Chat/Cam/Phone, Feet, Kissing, Master/Slave, Nipple play, Oral, Porn, Rimming, Rough, Suits, Toys.” For the unitiated, Bondage, Master/Slave and Rough refer to homosexual sadism/masochism; Feet suggests a foot fetish; anal denotes homosexual anal sex (extremely high risk); while Rimming refers to oral-anal stimulation — a known risk factor for hepatitis because the practitioner’s mouth comes into contact with feces. NEXGAY requires members to be 18 years old.

GLSEN targets younger and younger students

"NEXGAY" web profile photo for "Charly" showed his exposed phallus (covered up here). Charly advertises his "sexual interests" as: "Anal, Bi/Straight, Bondage, Chat/Cam/Phone, Feet, Kissing, Master/Slave, Nipple play, Oral, Porn, Rimming, Rough, Suits, Toys." The link to the pornographic NEXGAY "gay" hook-up site was just one click away from the GLSEN "Gay Straight Alliances" Facebook page.

The Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) is the leading activist group promoting the acceptance of homosexuality, bisexual and transsexuality (transgenderism) in schools. One of the main ways it does that is through “Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs),” which are de facto pro-homosexual booster clubs and which now exist in thousands of high schools and colleges across the United States. GLSEN has always marketed its agenda as protecting the “safety” of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) students — engendering sympathy for its activist work among impressionable youth — but critics question how the promotion of sexual identies tied to unhealthy LGBT behaviors can possibly be termed “safe.” (The CDC, in a recently published 2008 survey from several major cities, reports that nearly one in five  ”men who have sex with men” were infected with the HIV virus, and 44 percent of those did not even know it until they were tested.)

The pro-homosexuality GSA clubs are increasingly making their way into middle schools, where the age range of students is 11-14 or perphaps 15 if the school includes 9th grade. See this San Francisco Unified School District flier on middle school GSAs, from which the following is excerpted:

[Q:] “It makes sense to have a GSA in High School, but why should we have a GSA’s in Middle School?

[A:] “Each year more and more Middle School students are coming out: they and their friends need a safe place to share their experiences and ask questions. In all likelihood, there are also students who have parents or family members who are LGBT.”

We do not have the figures for how many middle schools allow GSAs, but based on the testimonies on GLSEN’s Facebook pages and other homosexual youth venues, it is clear that aggressively “out” homosexuality is on the rise among younger teens and even pre-teens. (Estimates of pro-homosexual student-clubs are unreliable due to their fluid nature, with students graduating and leaving school.)

GLSEN’s history: exposing children to reckless homosexual promiscuity

This latest incident involving a GLSEN link with “gay” porn and the particularly prodigious promiscuity associated with male homosexuality is not the first time GLSEN has been exposed as contradicting its “safety” mantra. Below are a few examples:

• Boston: “Fistgate” — In 2000, at a GLSEN-sponsored youth conference, young teens were guided in a “how-to” discussion — led by homosexual instructors — about the grotesque and dangerous sexual-sadistic practice of “fisting” — in which a man inserts his hand and forearm up the rectum and into the colon of his sex partner; see Mass Resistance story on “Fistgate” HERE;
• Chicago: pornographic advertisements: at the annual GLSEN national conference in 2000, organizers distributed Chicago “gay guides” containing ads for homosexual bathhouses (anonymous sex clubs), gay “leather” (sadomasochist) bars, and homosexual phone sex lines. Similar raunchy advertisements or homosexual “safer sex” fliers reportedly have been distributed at other GLSEN conferences;
• GLSEN’s perverse “Recommended Reading” list of books for high school and adolescent LGBT students include many with overtly sexual themes including one (Rainbow Boys) featuring a sexual encounter between a 17-year-old boy and a 29-year-old man he met on the Internet;
• GLSEN founder Kevin Jennings (appointed by President Obama to be “Safe Schools” deputy at the Department of Education), became the subject of widespread controversy when it was reported that — as a teacher at a Boston-area prep school — Jennings failed to report to authorities when one of his underage male students confessed to him that he had been seduced by a homosexual man. Instead, Jennings used the tragic incident to confirm the boy as “gay.”

Homosexual promiscuity infects youth

NEXGAY profile page asks members to give their "penis size" for prospective sex partners they might hook up with online. This shallow and perverse aspect of homosexual life is rarely discussed in the media. As is shown above, the window containing the measurement choices (5 to 27 cm) comes up on a drop-down menu. Click on photo to enlarge.

Although it receives precious little media coverage, the exposure of youth to the perverted and hyper-promiscuous male homosexual hook-up culture deserves scrutiny — especially with young “men who have sex with men” continuing to have high rates of HIV and other sexual-transmitted diseases.

Surely few Americans are aware of the behaviors and peculiar, twisted carnality of the sex-saturated “gay” male subculture — e.g., the “penis-size” profile category on the NEXGAY website shown at right. Among the other personal profile categories on the NEXGAY site are the following (with options in red):

• Sex: Male; Female; Trans
• [Sexual preference] I am: Gay individual; Bisexual individual; Curious individual; Straight individual; Gay couple; Bisexual couple; Curious couple; Straight couple; Gay group; Curious group; Straight group; an Organization; Other
• [Sodomy position] Role: Top/Active; Top/Vers[atile]; Versatile; Bottom/Vers; Bottom/Passive
• Body hair: None/smooth; Little; Average; Hairy; Shaved; Landscaped [Editor's note: historically, the "gay" slang term "smooth" has been used by adult homosexual men to describe much-sought-after youthful males, who are called "Twinks"];
• Drugs [use drugs?]: Often; Socially; Rarely; Never
• Safe Sex: Always; Discuss; Never
• HIV [status]: Neg; Pos; Unknown
• Escort [sex with male prostitute]: Yes; Discuss; Never
• [Circumcised penis?]  Cut/Uncut: Cut; Uncut

Most adults would be shocked to learn of such detailed catering to and categorizing of perversion — much less teens and even pre-teens who might have reached the site after clicking on the “NEXGAY” ad link off the GLSEN “Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook page.

‘Charly’s’ past and his future

But there is another aspect to the “NEXGAY”-GLSEN linkage that is symbolic of the tragedy of youth entering the sordid homosexual world. Note these three statements by ”Charly,” the young man from Hammond, Indiana, who posted the pornographic profile on the “gay dating” site. They are among 25 that he listed on his profile page:

My greatest fear is the future.

I am not a great follower of rules and I love risk-taking.

Despite being baptized under Christianity, I do consider myself one, but no one and nothing decides what I believe!

Some time not too long ago Charly lived the innocent and wholesome life of a boy — or so we would hope. Now, at just 23, he is apparently already engaging in — or desires to engage in – some of the most deplorable perversions known to mankind.  We pray that his future would see a return to (real) Christianity — i.e., salvation through Jesus Christ, and deliverance from homosexuality. Charly is responsible for his own conduct, but his descent into the “gay” male hook-up culture — and that of tens of thousands of young men like him — is made easier when society breaks from its biblical moorings and promotes sin and destructive behaviors in the name of tolerance, civil rights, and – worst of all — youth “safety.”

You can reach Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth, at americansfortruth@gmail.com.

_________________________________________________________

More photos and GLSEN”s whitewashed Facebook page:

The webmasters for GLSEN's "GSA" Facebook page quickly removed a photo-ad for sex-tourism in Thailand, called "Gay Trip Thailand" after a pro-family group, Mission America, exposed that and other gay-sex-oriented links on the site.

WHITEWASHED PAGE: GLSEN "GSA" Facebook page stripped of controversial photo-ads: note the absense of the NEXGAY ads, the "Gay Trip Thailand," and the photo advertising the movie "Blueprint" in this cleaned-up version.

Above is the photo for "Gay Trip Thailand" that appeared on GLSEN's "Gay-Straight Alliance" Facebook page before it was yanked on April 11. Click to enlarge. At bottom is cover for homosexual-themed movie "Blueprint" promoted on the GLSEN "GSA" Facebook page. This cover did not appear on the GLSEN site but rather another photo that linked to website about the movie. "Blueprint" is available for view on the website of "TLA," a large distributor of homosexual pornographic videos.

]]> http://americansfortruth.com/2011/04/12/breaking-homosexual-glsen-day-of-silence-facebook-page-linked-to-pornographic-gay-male-hook-up-site/feed/ 0 http://americansfortruth.com/2010/11/29/fischer-on-what-the-pope-really-said-about-condoms/ http://americansfortruth.com/2010/11/29/fischer-on-what-the-pope-really-said-about-condoms/#comments Mon, 29 Nov 2010 15:47:22 +0000 Peterlab http://americansfortruth.com/?p=8162 This excerpt is from the website of “Rightly Concerned,” a project of AFA (American Family Association):

In Defense of the Pope

By Bryan Fischer, Tuesday, November 23, 2010 10:31 AM

The New York Times has done to the Pope on condoms what the out-of-the-mainstream has done to me on the Medal of Honor: so distorted his words that they accuse of him of saying the exact opposite of what he actually said.

According the Gray (and fading) Lady, the Pope said “that condom use can be justified in some cases to help stop the spread of AIDS…”

Sorry, Charlie, that’s not what he said.

For openers, he flatly denied that condoms are the solution to the AIDS problem: “We cannot solve the problem by distributing condoms.” It’s difficult to be any clearer than that.

Here is the central paragraph in the Pope’s interview, with emphasis added:

“There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality.”

What part of “not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection” does the New York Times not understand? A third grader can understand that better than the arrogant, out of touch, and self-appointed elitists at the Times.

The Pope’s point is that if a homosexual begins to use condoms, it could represent a dawning moral awareness on his part that homosexual conduct is not a victimless crime, and that his action of using certain body parts for sexual pleasure poses a real, live health risk to the passive recipient of his sexual expression.

It may be the first step on a path that could lead a practitioner of sexually abnormal behavior back to normative and normal sexuality.

Rather than a ringing endorsement of condom use, it is rather a recognition that such use may represent the first step in repudiating homosexuality altogether. [continued at "Rightly Concerned"...Click HERE to read the rest of Fischer's column]

Elaine Donnelly testifies against homosexualizing the military in the name of "nondiscrimination." Donnelly cautions that few lawmakers realize the radical changes that would result from opening up the Armed Forces to homosexuals -- including the persecution of moral-minded servicemembers and chaplains.

TAKE ACTION: Elaine Donnelly rightly warns in an interview with AFTAH of the devastating impact of Obama’s plan to homosexualize our military. Have you contacted both your U.S. Senators to oppose repealing the military’s common-sense homosexuality ban? Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) says he has the votes to move forward on a Defense bill containing the repeal measure. A repeal vote by the lame-duck Senate could come any time after Dec. 1. Call 202-224-3121 or go to www.Congress.org to make your voice heard!

____________________________________

This interview [click HERE to listen] with Center for Military Readiness founder and president Elaine Donnelly aired Nov. 20, 2010, and was recorded Nov. 17. As the leading proponent of maintaining the military’s common-sense ban on homosexuality, Donnelly more than any other American has fought debilitating “politically correct” agendas in the Armed Forces. In this discussion, she covers:

• the unforeseen harm to good order and discipline that would result from allowing open homosexuals in the military;
• how the Pentagon working group report on the repeal of the “gay” ban is a thinly-veiled tool to advance President Obama’s radical plan to homosexualize the miltary; 
• how the Obama administration led by Defense Sec. Robert Gates has politicized the investigations of homosexual soldiers violating the existing homosexual ban — effectively neutralizing the law;
• why “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is NOT the law of the land;
• how pro-homosexual diversity sessions and policies would be foisted on the conservative military culture to enforce “sexual orientation nondiscrimination”;
• the radical effect on military housing policy resulting from repealing the “gay” ban;
• how religious serviemembers and chaplains who oppose homosexuality as a matter of faith and conscience could be targeted for disciplinary action in a homosexuality-affirming military — especially if their opposition were to become public;
• the implications of a “zero tolerance” policy for soldiers expressing opposition to homosexuals in the military;
• what the surveys actually show regarding military and public attitudes toward the military’s homosexuality ban. 

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

11-20-10, Elaine Donnelly, All

Our nation just had a momentous election in which many politicians who were pro-homosexuality and pro-abortion were thrown out. Still, our work defending God’s Truth will only become more important after a new Congress is sworn in.  So why not get energized on Saturday, Nov. 13 by coming to the Americans For Truth banquet at Christian Liberty Academy in Arl. Heights, IL, to hear our keynote speaker, Pastor Ken Hutcherson?  “Hutch” will psych you up to stand boldly for Truth in the Culture War — but more important than that, he will motivate you in your spiritual life to pursue godliness through Jesus Christ!

EARLY SIGN-UP DISCOUNT: Tickets for the banquet are $75 per person (after Nov. 8) and at the door. Married couples (one man, one woman only!) get a discount and can attend for $100 per couple. Please RSVP to americansfortruth@gmail.com and let us know you are coming — or that your pastor is coming for free.  You can make your gift online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate  or send your check to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.

I greatly enjoyed my three AFTAH Radio Hour interviews with Hutch (see link info below to listen), but I was also humbled, and even a bit shamed at one point in the exchange.  Here’s a guy with cancer weakened by daily ‘chemo’ treatments — and he still spends a lot more time in the Word of God than I do.  I barely know Hutch, but already he has caused me to reevaluate my priorities in life and inspired me to more diligently pursue godliness.

And when it comes down to it, isn’t that what America needs?  Time spent to learn God’s will and then the humble obedience to follow it.  Politics can only take us so far, especially in a deeply morally compromised and “proud” nation that is leaving God behind. 

So please come to our AFTAH banquet.  Tell a friend about it.  Bring your children.  (Pastors can come for FREE; sponsor your pastor with an extra $50 gift!)   If you are a homosexual, come (as long as you don’t plan on disrupting our event)!  But most importantly, bring your brain and your heart and have them ready to be challenged!  As anyone who has attended our events knows, they are not schmaltzy affairs but are loaded with Truth — because we try to live up to our name, Americans for TRUTH About Homosexuality.  In a way, AFTAH with its uncompromising message is the conscience of the pro-family movement on the homosexual issue — that’s why we seek out leaders like Hutch who have shown that they value Truth more than Political Correctness, and loyalty to God more than worldy praise. 

I hope to see you at CLA in Arlington Heights on Saturday, Nov. 13.  You will be blessed by coming, I can assure you of that. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

P.S. Please read the WND column below by Hutch, who asks why — if America cares about teaching our kids to be healthy — we don’t educate them on the massive health risks associated with homosexual behavior!  

______________________________________________

Online links to Americans For Truth Hour Radio interviews with Pastor Hutcherson (links contain short descriptions of each show):

• Week 3 (aired Oct. 23, 2010); http://americansfortruth.com/news/part-three-interview-with-dr-ken-hutcherson.html
• Week 2 (Oct. 16): http://americansfortruth.com/news/part-two-interview-with-pastor-ken-hutcherson.html
• Week 1 (Oct. 9): http://americansfortruth.com/news/part-one-aftah-interview-with-dr-ken-hutcherson-aftah-banquet-speaker.html

Americans For Truth Hour Archive page: http://americansfortruth.com/americans-for-truth-hour ; other interviews: Dawn Stefanowicz, Matt Barber, Bob Knight, Linda Harvey, Laurie Higgins, Pete Lines, Linda Jernigan, Pastor Calvin Lindstrom and Lynn Thomas, Col. Dick Black, Prof. Rob Gagnon, Ryan Sorba, Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, John McCartney and Wayne Lela, Amy Contrada, Brian Camenker, Mike Heath and Michael Glatze.

_________________________________________

Info on AFTAH Banquet:

Who: Pastor Ken Hutcherson, Pastor, Antioch Bible Church, Redmond, WA, former NFL linebacker (Dallas Cowboys, Seattle Seahawks)

When: Saturday, Nov. 13, 2010; 6:00 PM; doors open at 5:30

Where: Christian Liberty Academy, 502 W. Euclid Ave., Arlington Heights, IL 60004.

Tickets: $50 per person if purchased by Mon., Nov. 8; $75 after that and at the door. Pay online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate. Or mail your check to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. Pastors attend FREE; sponsor a pastor with your extra gift of $50!

RSVP: Send us an e-mail at ameicansfortruth@gmail.com. Phone: 630-717-7631.

Extra info: Don’t be intimidated by the announced protest at our banquet of the Gay Liberation Network — a Chicago-based, Marxist homosexual hate organization.  They picket all of our events.  GLN hates AFTAH because they know that we will never give in to their lies and intimidation, and that we will always proclaim the truth: that homosexual practice is wrong but changeable and forgivable through Jesus Christ!

Background on Hutch: Ken Hutcherson is a former NFL football player, but most importantly he is a man of God who has proven himself a faithful ambassador for his Savior, Jesus Christ.   You may have heard him interviewed on the Rush Limbaugh Show.   “Hutch” founded and pastors Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, Washington (home of Microsoft).  He organized two massive “May Day for Marriage” rallies – in Seattle and Washington, D.C. – to defend traditional marriage.  He took on the pro-homosexual “Day of Silence” in his child’s school by sponsoring a large counter-rally – which led to him and his family being persecuted by homosexual activists.  That did not deter Hutch, who continues to speak out boldly against the homosexual agenda while extending the Gospel to people trapped in homosexuality.
 
Come hear how the Lord delivered Hutcherson from his racism and hatred, and how this godly man looks to everything — even his current battle with cancer — to conform himself to the image of Jesus Christ.  Bring your pastor (for free) to hear Hutch’s challenge never to back down from God’s Truth in the fight against evil!

________________________________________________

Column by Hutcherson in WorldNetDaily.com:

‘Transgender, Transsexual and Trans fats’

WorldNetDaily, Posted: August 18, 2010, 1:00 am Eastern

By Ken Hutcherson

In June I bought a full-page ad in our local gay newspaper during gay-pride week to bring attention to a lifestyle that is protected even though proven to be dangerous and unhealthy. If something is deemed unhealthy, it does not take a public vote before school boards, cities, the federal government and many parents take whatever steps are necessary to eliminate access to that danger.

How many times have you heard the unfairness, hatred and the mistreatment of trans fats? It is thought that trans fats may be unhealthy, along with sugar and salt. And the list of unhealthy food choices grows daily.

The Centers For Disease Control has said and proven that the homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy and dangerous to those who participate in it. I will prove that point a little later in this article. The evidence cannot be argued – ignored, yes, but not debated.

Where is the public outcry when this dangerous lifestyle choice is promoted by schools, cities, states, courts and the federal government? Where is the evidence that we care about homosexuals when a judge overturns the decision of 7 million voters who passed Proposition 8, and is applauded for encouraging many to marry while living this hurtful lifestyle? We stand strong on the danger (albeit highly debatable) of certain foods that we suspect might be injurious to our health but turn a blind eye to homosexuality, which inarguably kills its participants.

The National Day of Silence, sponsored by GLSEN, took place at schools across the country again in April. According to GLSEN’S website, “On the National Day of Silence hundreds of thousands of students nationwide take a vow of silence to bring attention to anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and even harassment in their schools.” In other words, the purpose of the day is to stand in solidarity with homosexual victims.

The illusion that the homosexual lifestyle is a normal way of living has been successfully propagated by promoting a “victim” image for homosexual persons and by the pseudo-science alleging a “gay” gene. Evidence does show that homosexual persons are indeed victims – but overwhelmingly of their own behavior, not that of others. Why do cities, states and our federal government help these victims by celebrating with them in gay-pride events, and why do schools celebrate an entire day during the National Day Of Silence? For those who are so health conscience, if you are truly interested in removing those things that are dangerous to society, you need to examine the question of why the deadly homosexual lifestyle is protected.

Why is the lie about the existence of the gay gene and the falsehood that homosexuals are not able to change because they were born that way so widely promoted? Think about this common-sense scenario: If a man ever got pregnant, could anyone say from that day forward that it is impossible for men to get pregnant? The answer is a resounding “no.” You would never again be able to say it is impossible. Using the same logic, if one homosexual ever changed and got out of that lifestyle, can the statement be made that it is impossible for homosexuals to change?

The answer is again a resounding “no!” You would never again be able to say it is impossible. We know of many homosexuals, and I am friends with many, who have gotten out of the homosexual lifestyle by one decision – to stop. One of the most famous ones is the breakup of Ellen Degeneres and Ann Heche. Ann broke it off with Ellen and married a man and is living a heterosexual lifestyle at this very moment. I am black, was born black and will die black – I assure you of that. I can’t even take a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, because it is obvious who I am. I have never met an ex-black man (even Michael Jackson could not accomplish that), but I have met countless ex-homosexuals who are living a victorious heterosexual life. Why do we allow the lie to continue to be perpetrated, and why do we keep encouraging homosexuals to stay in this deadly lifestyle?

I have read the Constitution and cannot find anywhere that it protects same-sex marriage. If the Constitution does not protect same-sex marriage, then how can a judge in California declare Proposition 8 unconstitutional? It is a perversion of the Constitution to give protection to a group that can move in and out of that group just by making a conscious decision.

According to the Centers For Disease Control website as of June 12, 2010:

• The No. 1 risk factor for contracting HIV/AIDS is and always has been homosexual sex.
• 56,000 new cases of HIV/AIDS are diagnosed each year in the U.S.
• As of 2006, there were 1 million people living with HIV/AIDS, up 11 percent from 2003.
• Homosexual/bisexual individuals are seven times more likely to contemplate or commit suicide.
• Homosexuals die decades earlier than heterosexuals.
• Nearly one-half of practicing homosexuals admit to 500 or more sex partners, and nearly one-third admit to 1,000 or more sex partners in a lifetime.
• Individuals who have ever engaged in homosexual sex are prohibited from donating blood.

Legislators around the country are considering banning sugar and fatty foods in schools, removing salt and butter from restaurants and want to control what temperature you can have in your own homes, because they fear the potential of health problems. Perhaps they should consider banning the promotion of a lifestyle that the Centers For Disease Control has determined actually causes HIV/AIDS. On the Day of Silence, an entire school day is set aside to ensure every young, impressionable student is exposed to homosexuality. Does this really make sense to you?

As parents, school board members, city councilors and judges, why are we excited about promoting this lifestyle?  If any other lifestyle produced the previously quoted statistics, would we be having a day to celebrate it?

The most important reason this lifestyle is such a concern is because it keeps those living the life from accepting the saving grace of Jesus Christ. I am so very concerned about our nation because God will turn a nation over to judgment for sexual sin. With the recent court decision in California and with our nation embracing and celebrating this dangerous and unnatural lifestyle, we are courting disaster. I think we are close to judgment my friends, and I love this nation too much to stay silent.

Oh, by the way, God wants His rainbow back!

__________________________________

Dr. Kenneth L. Hutcherson is the senior pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Kirkland, Wash. He is also a former NFL linebacker for the Dallas Cowboys and Seattle Seahawks.

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

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

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

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

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

Teenage boy in McDonald's-France TV ad pines after another boy in his all-boys school. McDonald's COO Don Thompson says the ad will not run in the USA. But as a Christian he should be concerned that the corporation is promoting sinful, unhealthy sexual lifestyles to young men in any country.

TAKE ACTION: You can write McDonald’s HERE or call 1-800-244-6227; or write: McDonald’s Corporation, Attn: Jim Skinner and Don Thompson, 2111 McDonald’s Dr., Oak Brook, IL 60523.

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, perhaps you’ve seen the YouTube of this wicked McDonald’s TV commercial in France, featuring a homosexual teenage boy in love with another member of his all-boys school. (His out-of-touch, hopelessly ‘heterosexist’ father still thinks of his son as a potential lady’s man.) Since I saw the ad a while ago, I have stopped eating at McDonalds — which has had the added bonus of helping to keep my already protruding gut from officially being designated as “super-sized.”  

To a significant degree, McDonald’s with its high-calorie fare has always been in the business of promoting unhealthy lifestyles; now it has added unhealthy sexual lifestyles to the mix. To be sure, McDonald’s does not include promoting wholesomeness and time-tested Judeo-Christian morality among its “core values.” In a contorted defense of the fast food giant’s marketing practices, McDonald’s Chief Operation Officer Don Thompson told the Chicago Tribune in March that the French ad will not  be running in the USA. But the “Come as You Are” commercial has received wide publicity and gotten over two million hits on YouTube, so that’s a small comfort to Americans who have no interest in promoting youth homosexuality when they buy a Big Mac, or a Happy Meal for their young children.

Here’s FOX’s Bill O’Reilly segment on the French commercial — note how O’Reilly repeats the old homosexual-activist myth that “gays are ten percent of the population” — followed by more commentary and a McDonald’s-France letter defending it:  

As you can read in the Tribune interview, excerpted below, Thompson is a very public Christian, which is a good thing. But I find it deeply disturbing and hypocritical that he apparently is not troubled by McDonald’s' promotion of sinful and deviant behavior to young people — as long as it occurs in France where homosexuality is much less controversial than in the United States.

Of course, Thompson is a company man, so he has to toe the line in his public statements. But Christianity is not divided by national borders and he must know that promoting wrong and unhealthy sexual lifestyles to French teenage boys is every bit as evil and reckless as promoting sinful lifestyles to American boys. (Are you getting a feel for how post-modern, pro-homosexual Corporate America is corrupting the souls of its devoted employees?) 

[TAKE ACTION: You can write McDonald's HERE or call 1-800-244-6227; or write: McDonald's Corporation, Attn: Jim Skinner and Don Thompson, 2111 McDonald's Dr., Oak Brook, IL 60523.]

McDonald's COO Don Thompson

Changeable, male homosexuality is not “who you are” but is more rightly understood as a high-risk perversion – as evidenced by its disproportionately high linkage to various sexually transmitted diseases including HIV. (The “rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men,” the CDC reported in March. “The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men,” it reported.) Getting by on the technicality that this youth-corrupting ad is only running in another (more decadent, less religious) country is the coward’s way out of a shameful PR disaster for the fast-food behemoth. And that defense has only alienated both sides of the debate: pro-”gay” advocates are upset that the McDonald’s-France commercial is not running in the U.S.   

McDonald’s and its CEO, Jim Skinner (and COO Don Thompson) owe an apology to French moms and dads — and French young people — for promoting the unnatural, disease-producing homosexual lifestyle to French boys as some kind of innocuous, natural — and “cool” — identity. Until that apology comes, I am avoiding the famed Golden Arches. If you join me, it will be one of the healthiest corporate boycotts you ever engage in — but please make sure that you pay a visit to your local McDonald’s manager and franchise owner — to personally inform them of the reason that you are not eating there anymore. (Show them the YouTube ad.) Then they can relay your message of concern up the corporate ladder.

Thanks for standing up for moral sanity and truth against Corporate America’s increasingly brazen promotion of sexual immorality, in the name of that modern, Orwellian euphemism, ”diversity.” – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org   

P.S. Memo to pro-homosexuality activists: if you want to negate our boycott: have at it! The Big Macs, fries and Quarter-Pounders, dripping with grease and loaded with fat-producing calories, are there to be eaten. Here’s a caloric rundown of some popular McDonald’s menu items, courtesy of Shapefit.com:

Big Mac: 570 calories
Quarter Pounder: 430 (w/cheese: 530 c.)
Large French Fries: 540 c.
Crispy Chicken Deluxe Sandwich: 500 c.
File-O-Fish Sandwich: 470 c.
Big Xtra! Hamburger: 710 c. (w/ cheese 810 c.)
Oreo McFlurry: 570 c.
Sausage McMuffin w/ Egg Sandwich: 440 c.
Chicken McNuggets 9-piece: 430 c.

_______________________________________________________

Here is a clearer YouTube version of the McDonald’s ad (after it starts playing, you may need to close the “Google Ads” box so you can better view the English subtitles):

_______________________________________________________

Tribune Interview with McDonald’s COO Don Thompson:

Excerpt from Chicago Tribune reporter Michael Oneal’s June 13, 2010 interview with McDonald’s COO Don Thompson. Note that Thompson’s response begs the question: just what are McDonald’s “core values” if they include promoting the acceptance of youth homosexuality to the wider culture? (Emphasis added below:)

Tribune: A French TV ad featuring a gay teen and his father has stirred some controversy — not there, but here. Can you talk about that?

Thompson: It is an example that markets, cultures are very different around the world. (For instance), I’ve never shied away from the fact that I’m a Christian. I have my own personal beliefs and I don’t impose those on anybody else. I’ve been in countries where the majority of the people in the country don’t believe in a deity or they may be atheist. Or the majority of the country is Muslim. Or it may be the majority is much younger skewed. So when you look at all these differences, it’s not that I’m to be the judge or the jury relative to right or wrong. Having said that, at McDonald’s, there are core values we stand for and the world is getting much closer. So we have a lot of conversations. We’re going to make some mistakes at times. (We talk) about things that may have an implication in one part of the world and may be the cultural norm in another part of the world. And those are things that, yes, we’re going to learn from. But, you’re right, that commercial won’t show in the United States.

Tribune: How has it done in France?

Thompson: Interestingly enough, there have been no negatives coming out of France. The brand is a local brand and different things will occur in different parts of the world. We just have to make sure that we understand the impact one action may make on another part of the world.

_________________________________________________

[TAKE ACTION: You can write McDonald's HERE or call 1-800-244-6227; or write: McDonald's Corporation, Attn: Jim Skinner and Don Thompson, 2111 McDonald's Dr., Oak Brook, IL 60523.]

_________________________________________________

McDonald’s-France Reply to American Customer Concerned over Pro-Homosexual Ad

The following letter was sent by McDonald’s France in response to an  American customer who wrote to express his concern over the corporation’s homosexuality-affirming TV ad:

July 5, 2010

Mr. ________________,

I have received your letter regarding our advertising film “Come as You Are.”

The ad you’re referencing is one of a series of ads called “Come as You Are” which recognizes the diversity of McDonald’s customers in France.

The campaign was designed to communicate the true McDonald’s experience in France: a place where you can be yourself, whatever your state of mine, your background; a place where you can feel free of constraints, a place where you can ‘Come as You Are.’ Since its launch, the campaign has acheived high awareness and it has been received positively by the majority of the French public.

The goal with this new phase of the campaign is to continue to build on the emotional connection created between the brand and the French [public. By] going beyond a simple description of our customers we actually tell their stories, capturing their personality and their emotions.

Through these films McDonald’s pays tribute to the diversity of its customers and the richness of their stories.

I hope you’ll better understand the aim of your [sic] “Come as You Are” communications campaign.

Your [sic] sincerely,

Nathalie Febvre
Customer Services Department
McDonald’s France Services

Linda Jernigan

Here is Part Two of our interview with Linda Jernigan, which aired July 10, 2010. [see Part One of the interiew HERE.] In the interview, Jernigan, a former lesbian, is joined on air by Pastor Roger Ford, a former homosexual. Their discussion with AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera is fascinating on many levels — not least of which is the fact that both Jernigan and Ford were seduced into homosexuality as underage kids. (Gay activists denounce and ridicule any linkage between pedophilia and homosexuality.)

Jernigan’s real life parallels the awful “Vagina Monologues” play by radical feminist Eve Ensler in which a 13-year-old girl was seduced into lesbianism by a woman who was supposed to be a role model in the community. (In a later version of the play, Ensler changed the victim’s age to 16.) Jernigan tells AFTAH how when she was just 12 years old, a woman who was supposed to be her “mentor” began exposing Jernigan to sexual banter and discussions, and then started asking Jernigan about her sexual feelings. This led to the woman seducing Jernigan into sex and the lesbian lifestyle.

In the case of Pastor Ford, he was “manipulated” into homosexuality by an older teenage boy (age 18) when Ford was 12 or 13. The young man began by complimenting Ford, whose effeminacy made him a social reject. Ford’s father died when he was very young, which he says contributed to him being drawn into homosexuality. Ford and Jernigan (www.RescuingHomosexuals.net) both reach out with the Gospel to people trapped in the homosexual lifesyle, and help them find freedom in Christ. 

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

7-10-10, Linda Jernigan & Pastor Roger Ford, All

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

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

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

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

6-12-10, Matt Barber, All

[To listen to the ONN story online, click on "HEAR REPORT" button at upper right corner of the ONN story; to subscribe to ONN's "Daily News Brief," click HERE; to subscribe to ONN's Web Alerts, click HERE. ]

______________________________________________

LaBarbera: UNAIDS has ‘backwards’ thinking
By Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow – 3/17/2010

A United Nations Aids agency complains that homosexuals, drug users and prostitute don’t seek help because of laws that criminalize their practices.

Michel Sidibe of UNAIDS is quoted as saying it is unacceptable that 85 countries still make homosexual conduct illegal, but Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), does not accept that thinking.

“They’ve got everything backwards,” he contends. “Rather than have a campaign – for example an anti-sodomy campaign, an anti-prostitution campaign, an anti-drug abuse campaign that targets the bad behaviors themselves – instead they target countries that are trying to implement conservative policies that target homosexuality.”

In compatibility with his logic, Sidibe suggests that laws against the immoral behavior be changed.

“Mr. Sidibe is just completely confused,” LaBarbera notes. “He says that in states where there are not repressive laws, HIV is contained. Then he goes on to express shock that more than 50 percent of infections in the United States are among homosexuals. So he contradicts himself.”

Homosexual behavior is not illegal in this country, but the AFTAH president believes the answer to the issue is to launch an all-out campaign to educate people and change the behavior that results in infection. That is what reduced smoking in this country.

_____________________________________

Excerpts from the Associated Press story:

“New HIV infections increasing among homosexuals”

By EDITH M. LEDERER (AP) – March 16, 2010

NEW YORK — New HIV infections are increasing among homosexuals, drug users and prostitutes who don’t seek help because of laws that criminalize these practices, the head of the U.N. AIDS agency said Monday.

Michel Sidibe, the head of UNAIDS, said “it is unacceptable” that 85 countries still have laws criminalizing same sex relations among adults, including seven that impose the death penalty for homosexual practices.

He called a proposed Ugandan law that would impose the death penalty for some gays “very unfortunate” and expressed hope it will never be approved.

At a time when UNAIDS is scaling up its program and seeking universal access to HIV treatment, Sidibe said he was “very scared” because bad laws are being introduced by countries making it impossible for these at risk groups to have access to services.

“You have also a growing conservatism which is making me very scared,” Sidibe added….

Sidibe told a group of journalists at a luncheon hosted by the United Nations Foundation that in countries from China to Kenya and Malawi, about 33 percent of new HIV infections are in men having sex with men, a significant increase.

By contrast, he said that in the Caribbean where most countries don’t have repressive laws, only between 3 and 6 percent of HIV infections are in male homosexuals.

Even in the United States, where laws are not restrictive and the gay community was the first to tackle AIDS, Sidibe said it is “shocking” that more than 50 percent of new HIV infections last year occurred among homosexuals. And he said in the 19-25 age bracket the infection rate was even higher.

“It seems like we have come full circle” in the United States, he said. “After almost no cases a few years ago we are seeing again this new peak among people who are not having access to all the information, the protection that is needed.” …

In Nigeria, where there are 1,000 new HIV infections every day, over 30 percent are in vulnerable groups — drug users, sex workers and homosexuals, he said.

Sidibe called for “a prevention revolution” including a campaign in major cities around the world like the anti-smoking campaigns launched in recent years.

“The risk of HIV transmission through receptive anal sex is much greater than the risk of transmission via other sexual activities.” — CDC

"Where the boys are": homosexual bathhouses lure young men into anonymous sodomies. The CDC and Obama Administration should shut down these perversion centers or at least hit them with a large "sin tax." Above is taken from the Steamworks bathhouse chain's website.

Dear Readers, once again the reality that Nature itself discriminates against homosexuality breaks through the bureaucracy’s official political correctness on this issue. Note how the CDC admits that anal sex is  a much higher risk activity than other sexual practices. Yet to teach the special risks of sodomy in schools would be to invite a “discrimination” lawsuit by the ACLU! Homosexual oral sex also is mentioned as a risk factor for syphilis. So why don’t the nation’s “Best and Brightest” on this issue launch an educational, pro-health campaign against “gay” sex, especially sodomy?

A less bold option might be to levy a heavy “sin tax” on homosexual bathhouses and sex clubs where dangerous, anonymous, “queer” sex proliferates, or — God forbid — actually to shut down these perversion centers as public health hazards. (Instead, “gay” bathhouses like “Steamworks” (right) are flourishing and even offering “Spring Break discounts” to lure young men.)

We understand that such ideas are anathema to the “gay”-pandering fraternity of the enlightened who run the country’s incompetent “war on AIDS” — you know, the types who truly believe their own propaganda that “homophobia” helps spread HIV. But the folly of their failed approach is revealed by press releases like that below. Common sense dictates that our government get out of the “gay” advocacy business and start aggressively targeting homosexual practices linked directly to disease — rather than trying to make those inherently unsafe practices “safe.”

If you have any other ideas on how to target destructive homosexual behaviors rather than “homophobia,” write us at americansfortruth@comcast.net. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

____________________________

CDC – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

NCHHSTP – National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention

Press Release [emphasis added]

All Findings Embargoed Until: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 at 4:30pm EST
Contact: NCHHSTPMediaTeam@cdc.gov [the NCHHSTP is the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention within the CDC]; (404) 639-8895

CDC Analysis Provides New Look at Disproportionate Impact of HIV and Syphilis Among U.S. Gay and Bisexual Men

A data analysis released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention underscores the disproportionate impact of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men in the United States.

The data, presented at CDC’s 2010 National STD Prevention Conference, finds that the rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women.

The range was 522-989 cases of new HIV diagnoses per 100,000 MSM vs. 12 per 100,000 other men and 13 per 100,000 women.

The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men and more than 71 times that of women, the analysis says. The range was 91-173 cases per 100,000 MSM vs. 2 per 100,000 other men and 1 per 100,000 women.

While CDC data have shown for several years that gay and bisexual men make up the majority of new HIV and new syphilis infections, CDC has estimated the rates of these diseases for the first time based on new estimates of the size of the U.S. population of MSM. Because disease rates account for differences in the size of populations being compared, rates provide a reliable method for assessing health disparities between populations.

“While the heavy toll of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men has been long recognized, this analysis shows just how stark the health disparities are between this and other populations,” said Kevin Fenton, M.D., director of CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention. “It is clear that we will not be able to stop the U.S. HIV epidemic until every affected community, along with health officials nationwide, prioritize the needs of gay and bisexual men with HIV prevention efforts.”

For the purposes of determining rates of disease for MSM, CDC researchers first estimated the size of the gay and bisexual male population in the United States – defined as the proportion of men who reported engaging in same-sex behavior within the past five years. Based on an analysis of nationally representative surveys, CDC estimated that MSM comprise 2.0 percent (range: 1.4-2.7 percent) of the overall U.S. population aged 13 and older, or 4 percent of the U.S. male population (range: 2.8-5.3 percent). Disease rates per 100,000 population were then calculated using 2007 surveillance data on HIV and primary/secondary syphilis diagnoses and U.S. Census data for the total U.S. population.

The new analysis is the first step in more fully assessing the impact of HIV among MSM and other populations significantly affected by the disease. CDC is developing more detailed estimates of infection rates among MSM by race and age, as well as among injection drug users. CDC is also in the early stages of planning for estimates among heterosexuals. Ultimately, these data can be used to better inform national and local approaches to HIV and STD prevention to ensure that efforts are reaching the populations in greatest need.

Research shows that a range of complex factors contribute to the high rates of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men. These factors include high prevalence of HIV and other STDs among MSM, which increases the risk of disease exposure, and limited access to prevention services. Other factors are complacency about HIV risk, particularly among young gay and bisexual men; difficulty of consistently maintaining safe behaviors with every sexual encounter over the course of a lifetime; and lack of awareness of syphilis symptoms and how it can be transmitted (e.g., oral sex). Additionally, factors such as homophobia and stigma can prevent MSM from seeking prevention, testing, and treatment services.

Also, the risk of HIV transmission through receptive anal sex is much greater than the risk of transmission via other sexual activities, and some gay and bisexual men are relying on prevention strategies that may be less effective than consistent condom use.

“There is no single or simple solution for reducing HIV and syphilis rates among gay and bisexual men,” said Fenton. “We need intensified prevention efforts that are as diverse as the gay community itself. Solutions for young gay and bisexual men are especially critical, so that HIV does not inadvertently become a rite of passage for each new generation of gay men.”

Preventing HIV and STDs among gay and bisexual men is a top CDC priority. CDC provides funding to health departments and community-based organizations throughout the nation to implement proven behavior-change programs for MSM and will soon expand a successful HIV testing initiative to reach more gay and bisexual men. Additionally, CDC is implementing an updated National Syphilis Elimination Plan in cities where MSM have been hardest hit by the disease, and will release an updated HIV prevention strategic plan within the next year to support the President’s upcoming National HIV/AIDS Strategy. CDC officials note that the new analysis released today underscores the importance of the HIV and STD prevention efforts targeting gay and bisexual men recently announced as part of the President’s fiscal year 2011 budget proposal.

For more information on HIV or syphilis, please visit www.cdc.gov/hiv or www.cdc.gov/std.

Navy Capt. Jim Jefferis in uniform shortly before his retirement. He says the inevitable homo-sexual relationships that would occur in a homosexual-welcoming Navy would lead to preferential treatment that "can’t be hidden from other crewmembers and tends to destroy the chain of command, discipline and morale."

Folks, the following letter from Ret. Navy Captain Lawrence “Jim” Jefferis to Admiral Mike Mullen — President Obama’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a proponent of his plan to allow open homosexuals in the military — is one of the most compelling documents I have ever read against that terribly misguided idea. In an e-mail to AFTAH, Capt. Jefferis verified his authorship of the letter, which has been making the rounds via e-mail. He said that he had sent it to a few people with no intention of it going public, but now that it has, he is willing to have it published online.

Like me, I’m sure you feel a deep sense of sorrow that men of principle and common sense like Capt. Jefferis are being replaced in America’s military leadership by a new cast of politically correct officers like Adm. Mullen, who put dubious trends and expediency above principle and morality. Please read this letter carefully and then share it with your children, all of your elected representatives, and as many people as possible. God bless you, Capt. Jefferis, and thank you for your service to our country. — Peter LaBarbera, www.AmericansForTruth.com

TAKE ACTION: Send a copy of this letter by regular mail or fax (or e-mail) to your Congressman and Senators; go to www.congress.org to get their information.  Or call Congress at 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121 and urge them to oppose President Obama’s attempt to do an end-run around Congress to force open homosexuality on our Armed Forces. Also urge your elected representatives to OPPOSE H.R. 1283, which we’re calling the Homosexualize Our Military Act –a dangerous bill that would impose a “sexual orientation” non-discrimination order on the military.

WRITE SEN. McCAIN and ADM. MULLEN: Also please write/call Sen. John McCain (202-224-2235) to thank him for speaking out against Obama’s radical ”gay” military plan. You can write Adm. Mullen and/or Defense Secretary Robert Gates at the addresses below or by clicking HERE.

We reprint this letter as it came to us (with minor editing changes and explanations); Capt. Jefferis (Ret.) writes:

___________________________________________

February 8,  010

Admiral Mike Mullen, USN
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
9999 Joint Staff Pentagon
Washington, D.C. 20318-9999

Dear Admiral Mullen:

This letter is in response to your shocking statement last week that you advocate homosexuals openly serving in the military services.  I seriously question the wisdom of your position.  As I have previously written by my Senator, Harry Reid, and my Congresswoman, Dina Titus, the position appears to be more a matter of Democratic party voter pandering than the solution to a valid military issue.  Perhaps it was your willingness to support the Democratic agenda that earned you your present position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I am a retired Navy Captain.  I enlisted in the Navy in 1948, and served as a Yeoman, Personnel man, Journalist, and Communications Technician, and, as a Petty Officer First Class, received a commission in 1955 through the Integration Program.  In my more than 31 years of active duty, I commanded two ships, served as Executive Officer on two ships, commanded Coastal Squadron ONE (Swift Boats) in Vietnam, and was Chief Staff Officer on an Amphibious Squadron.  I developed the first Human Affairs Council in a Pacific Fleet ship in 1972, and supervised human affairs activities on seven PHIBRON ships.  I am a graduate of the School of Naval Justice, the Management Course at the Navy Postgraduate School, and the Senior Officer course at the Naval War College.  After retirement I received a Juris Doctorate from the Hastings College of Law.  Like you, I encountered homosexuals throughout my Navy career and in civilian life.  Unlike you, I do not find they are more deserving than non-homosexuals or that they constitute a viable or necessary body of troops for the defense of our country.

My experience is Naval.  I can’t speak for the Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps.  Those services are generally based ashore with nearby civilian communities.  In such communities, homosexuals may be able to find sexual gratification without interfering with military duties.  But the best analogy to a ship at sea is a prison.  There is no other outlet for sexual drives and I know of no prison in the United States that assigns males and females, or who intentionally assign known homosexuals, to the same cell.  That is one of the differences between your position and mine.

During my enlisted service, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot.  They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down an engineroom ladder.  Some were even known to trip on deck and “fall” overboard.  The crew had a way of policing themselves to eliminate homosexual advances.  Perhaps you are correct in your assumption that military personnel are more liberal today, but I would look very closely at prevalent attitudes before I closed the book on the issue.

It has been my experience that if sexual favors are available aboard ship, some enterprising sailor, petty officer, or officer will find a way to take advantage of the offer.  There is usually a senior/junior relationship in such exchanges and the senior partner will reward the junior with preferential treatment, such as duty assignments, watches, leave, liberty, and advancement.  Such preferential treatment can’t be hidden from other crewmembers and tends to destroy the chain of command, discipline and morale.  If a Chief Petty Officer, for example, is having sexual relations with a non-rated sailor, it will have an adverse impact on those petty officers between the two in the chain of command.  Because of your current assertions, I must assume that you were either lucky and didn’t have the problem during your shipboard assignments, or that you chose to ignore them!

That sexual misconduct in the Navy exists to this day is obvious. I recall that a lesbian ring was discovered on the USS NORTON SOUND back in the late 60′s or early 70′s.  At about the same time my wife, now a retired Navy Commander, was Executive Officer at the WAVES Barracks, Great Lakes Naval Training Center.  She was aware of many cases of homosexuality involving the WAVES assigned to the Barracks.  I also recall that one of the cruisers returning from the First Gulf War reported 40% of the female crewmembers were pregnant after a six-month deployment.  Just recently I read that the Commanding Officer and Command Master Chief were relieved from an Atlantic Fleet destroyer because of fraternization between several Chief Petty Officers and female members of the crew.  Just the other day I heard news reports that a birth control pill previously reserved for use by women in combat had to be made available to all females in  the military, clearly implying that intercourse was occurring in combat units and such conduct was known to unit commanders.  Is there some reason you believe that homosexual activity would not also occur or is not occurring?

As you should be aware, the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not address homosexuality, per se.  Article 125 provides that sodomy is a felony, to be punished as a court martial may direct.  But the Article does not discriminate against homosexuals.  Oral or anal sex between persons of the same sex (homosexuals), opposite sex (heterosexuals) or with animals (bestiality) are all considered felonies.  However, when the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was established, it only applied to homosexual activities.

In all my years of service, I never encountered a Commanding Officer who “asked” a subordinate if he was a homosexual.  I never knew of a sailor who was subjected to legal sanctions for homosexual conduct without corroborating evidence. A “confession” was not enough. Credible corroborating evidence had to exist and usually took the form of testimony of a participating party.

So the “policy” of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” makes no sense at all, except to create a means of ignoring the law.  But the policy can only as effective as the individual’s discretion.  As long as the homosexual was discreet, nothing would happen to him.  He could be sanctioned only if he wanted to go public.  However, by the same token, if a heterosexual indiscreetly advised his Commanding Officer that he had committed sodomy, he would be subject to the same sanctions.

In regard to heterosexual behavior, the UCMJ also proscribes common law marriage under the heading of Unlawful Cohabitation (with or without evidence of sexual intercourse).  It sanctions adultery and prostitution (for both the prostitute and the patron).  In the case of an officer, merely “consorting with a notorious prostitute” constitutes an offense, again even without evidence of sexual intercourse.  The problem is that common law marriage is legal in 11 states and the District of Columbia.  I don’t believe that adultery is a criminal offense in any state today.  And in my home state of Nevada, even prostitution is legal.  I don’t recall you asking Congress to legalize heterosexual sodomy, adultery, prostitution, or common law marriage.  There are many punitive articles in the UCMJ that have no relationship to the satisfactory performance of military duties, yet you single out homosexuals for preferred treatment.  Again, I must ask “why?”

The argument I hear most often expounded by the homophiles [pro-homosexual advocates] is that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy deprives the military of outstanding young men and women who want nothing more than to defend their country and that they have the ability to operate a radar, or a gas turbine, or a gun as well as a heterosexual.  That can’t be true.  It isn’t the “policy,” it is Article 125 of the UCMJ that criminalizes homosexual behavior since it would be virtually impossible to practice homosexuality without committing sodomy.  But, even if it were true, are homosexuals really worth the administrative problems they would create by their mere existence?

Adm. Mike Mullen, Obama's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, used "gay" activist rhetoric to affirm the idea of open homosexuals in the military. But Capt. Jim Jefferis asks: why is Mullen singling out homosexuals for special consideration?

The Navy, today, does not willingly accept GED [General Equivalency Diploma] holders for enlistment.  Minor criminal records are a bar to enlistment.  Visible tattoos and piercings are not permitted.  Are these aberrations more damning than sodomy?  Personnel may be denied reenlistment if they fail to meet obesity standards.  The young men and women denied naval service because of these exclusionary conditions may also want to defend their country and might also be able to satisfactorily operate a radar, or a gas turbine, or a gun.  But you are only advocating the acceptance of homosexuals!  Why is that, Admiral?

Is it your contention that cohabitors, adulterers, prostitutes, young men and women with tattoos, those with only GEDs, or the obese cannot serve as well as homosexuals?  If so, what is your empirical evidence to support such an argument?  If we can sanction heterosexual behavior, appearance, and alternative educations, why can’t we sanction homosexual sodomists?

If we get to pick and choose which laws we uphold, which laws are next on the line to ignore?  Carnal Knowledge?  I would think a service man or woman who has sex with a minor (Carnal Knowledge) could perform military duties as well, if not better, than a homosexual.  At least we don’t have children in combat, or in the military at large, for them to accost.  Their pedophilia would not impact on the performance of military duties.

If you are successful in your endeavors to have Congress modify the UCMJ, have you given any thought to the long-term repercussions?  When I joined the Navy, absence from duty because of venereal disease, self-inflicted wounds, even severe sun burn, was considered “Sick Misconduct.”  We were not paid for the periods we were absent from duty and our enlistments were extended on a day-for-day basis.  Since AIDS/HIV is more prevalent in the homosexual community than in the heterosexual community, have you considered the consequences of a homosexual serviceman contracting AIDS or HIV?  Will the homosexual with AIDS/HIV receive treatment from military sources?  Will it be considered a service-connected disability justifying a medical discharge and retirement benefits?  Will it result in Veterans Administration disability benefits?  And have you considered the likelihood that some of the homosexuals will request sex-change procedures?  I know for a fact that a significant percentage of my Law School class was undergoing sex-change therapy or surgery.  It made using heads [restrooms] confusing for both genders.  Sex-change is an issue being considered in civilian prisons today and I’m not convinced that taxpayers, or military budgets, should be burdened with that expense.  But, if you really want homosexuals, you should accept their baggage, as well as their bodies.

Do you also advocate same-sex marriage or “partnerships”?  Will the homosexual’s partner be entitled to dependents’ benefits, including health care, BAQ [Basic Allowance for Quarters], military base access, and commissary and exchange privileges?  Will they be entitled to military housing?  Would they be entitled to sex-change procedures at government expense?

Would a homosexual openly serving on active duty in a same-sex “marriage” be prosecuted for adultery if he or she has a sexual relationship outside the “marriage”?  Would a homosexual be prosecuted for prostitution?  Perhaps, in such cases, even you would reinstate the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

I raise the last point because while serving as Executive Officer on USS CATAMOUNT (LSD-17) in 1967, one of the Radarmen was arrested by local police.  While inventorying his personal effects a photograph of the sailor performing fellatio [oral sodomy] on another male was discovered.  The police turned the photo over to the Shore Patrol, who forwarded it to me.  During an investigation it was determined that five of the ship’s Radarmen were involved in a male prostitution ring.  They declared that while in Radarman Class “A” School at Treasure Island, their instructors convinced them that they could augment their military pay by providing homosexual services to gays in San Francisco.  They took advantage of the opportunity presented and continued such activity in San Diego.  CATAMOUNT sailed absent several Radarmen and the Class “A” School lost several instructors.  Are these otherwise competent Radarmen the type of sailors you want on your ships?  I hope not!

Your advocacy of gay rights reminds me of a joke popular in the Australian Navy in the 1970′s.  An officer with nearly 20 years service transferred from the [British] Royal Navy to the Royal Australian Navy.  When asked why, he stated that when he joined the Royal Navy, homosexuality was a crime and that homosexuals received severe punishment and discharge.  After a few years he noticed that senior officers were closing their eyes to the problem.  Eventually, it was made permissible. He decided to transfer before it became compulsory.  I think you are leading us down that road to compulsion, Admiral!

I fully realize that I should not judge you or your procurement source.  I have not walked the mile in your shoes.  But, by the same token, you have not walked a mile in mine.  I hope that you recognize that we are irreconcilably opposed on this issue, but I think I have given it more thought than you.  In retrospect, I now realize that of all the officers I served with on active duty, Naval Academy graduates were the most tolerant of homosexuals.  It may only be coincidence, but was there something in the curriculum that created such tolerance?  I am aware that there have been numerous scandals regarding drug use, academic cheating, and heterosexual misconduct, but had never before given much thought to their acceptance of homosexual behavior, despite my awareness that there was a tendency toward an anal fixation.

I do hope that you conduct a thorough, in-depth evaluation of this issue, and hope you reach a realistic final determination.  Assuming that your personal bias and the power of your office will result in your victory, I will watch retention statistics with a critical eye.  Our sailors won’t have the option of transferring to the Australian Navy.

In keeping with the requirements of Navy Regulations, I submit this with all the respect your rank and position deserve.

With due respect,

Lawrence R. Jefferis
Captain, U. S. Navy (Ret.)

2016 Diamond Peak Court
Las Vegas, NV 89117

jefferis@embarqmail.com

CC:

The Hon. Robert Gates
Secretary of Defense
1400 Defense Pentagon
Washington, D.C. 21201-1400

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

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

___________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

__________________________________

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

____________________________________________

All the bile that’s fit to print

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

Posted on WND January 13, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

____________________________

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

Star Parker, founder and president of CURE, says legalizing homosexual "marriage" is like offering a glass of wine to a drunk.

Folks, I wish more conservative leaders: a) understood the truth about government-celebrated homosexuality as Star Parker does; b) had the guts to take a strong public stand on the issue like the column below. We encourage you to check out Star’s organization, CURE (Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education) at www.urbancure.org. — Peter LaBarbera

Parker writes (emphasis and web links added):

____________________________________

Sodom in the nation’s capital

There is a centrality of the traditional family to the American dream of opportunity and a centrality of family breakdown to poverty

At a time when our country is sick, it shouldn’t surprise that one our sickest places is our nation’s capital.

The poverty rate of Washington, D.C., almost 20 percent, is one of the highest in the nation. Its child poverty rate is the nation’s highest..

D.C.’s public school system, with a graduation rate of less than 50 percent, is one of the worst in the country.

According to D.C.’s HIV/AIDS office, three percent of the local population has HIV or AIDS. The Administrator of this office notes that this HIV/AIDS incidence is “…higher than West Africa…on par with Uganda and some parts of Kenya.” And the principal way that HIV is transmitted continues to be through male homosexual activity.

Amidst this dismal picture, the D.C .City Council, perhaps on the theory that serving up another glass of wine is the way to help a drunk, is scheduled to vote on December 1 to legalize same-sex “marriage” in America’s capital city.

Looking at realities in Washington, D.C. should make clear why George Washington said, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

But the America that our first president had in mind was very different from the vision of our DC government officials.

George Washington’s America was one in which the point of freedom is to allow Man to rise to what he can become. To do this, the greatest challenge he faces is conquering himself. To rise above his baser instincts, to rise above the many temptations that lead him astray. And to achieve this end, as Washington said, “religion and morality are indispensible supports.”

In left-wing America, of which the D.C. government is a poster child, freedom means to indulge every instinct that the tradition and religion of George Washington would have us overcome.

Where does it lead? Well, look at D.C.

It is tempting to look at D.C.’s realities and just call this a black thing. And by and large it is.

DC is largely black — almost 60 percent. Its poverty is black poverty. Its public school system serves mostly black children. And its AIDS crisis is mostly among blacks.

But the pathologies that strike the weakest parts of our population most brutally are nonetheless pathologies of the nation.

The Brookings Institution is one of our oldest policy institutes and certainly no bastion of conservatism. But in a recently published volume, Brookings scholars Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill point out the centrality of the traditional family to the American dream of opportunity and the centrality of family breakdown to poverty.

Reporting data showing the general breakdown of the traditional American family, they say, “Some claim that anyone who is concerned about these trends is simply out of touch with modern culture; we respond that, if that be the case, then, “modern culture is out of touch with the needs of children.”

The Catholic Archdiocese of D.C. announced that legalization of same sex marriage would make it impossible to continue its relationship with the D.C. government and require termination of the social services it provides to some 68,000 of the city’s poor — including about one third of its homeless. The reaction of D.C. Council member David Catania was essentially “so what.” According to him, “their services are not indispensable.” [Editor's note: Catania is one of two open homosexual activists on the Council.]

Is Catania out of touch with the needs of D.C.’s poor?

No. He just has different priorities. More important to him, and more important to D.C.’s left-wing city council, is advancing moral relativism and the indulgences it feeds.

This is more important to them than feeding the poor or recognizing the values that would get them out of poverty.

It should concern every American as we watch our nation’s capital city transform officially into Sodom.

Star Parker is founder and president of the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE), a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Washington, D.C.  Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service.

New York Times resident "conservative" David Brooks says it is hard to take Sarah Palin seriously, yet he relied on specious "queer" theology in an attempt to justify legal homosexual "marriage" as a supposed moral cause that conservatives should support. Turning the Bible on its head, Brooks says NOT allowing homosexuals to get married is an "abomination."

By Peter LaBarbera

New York Times columnist and TV pundit David Brooks is a liberal’s kind of conservative. The other day, Brooks made news deriding Sarah Palin as a “joke” on a Sunday talk show. Liberal Palin-haters couldn’t be more pleased, as they always are when “moderate” (read: socially liberal) Republicans deride pro-family conservative Republicans.

Said Brooks about the former Republican Governor of Alaska and GOP vice-presidential candidate:

“She’s a joke. I can’t take her seriously,” he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “The idea that this potential talk show host is considered seriously for the Republican nomination, believe me, it will never happen. Republican primary voters are not going to elect a talk show host.”

I agree with conservative media critic Bernard Goldberg in explaining the dominant elite media’s contempt for Palin: she is a popular, pro-life, conservative, Christian woman — a mix that smug west- and east coast liberals don’t like and certainly not the kind of woman they want to see succeed, much less be President. Surely they are incredulous and envious of her popularity and power, which is far bigger than theirs will ever be (Brooks included).

But what about Brooks? His arrogant, rapid-fire put-down of Palin epitomizes the disdain that RINO (Republican In Name Only) Republicans have for the true, blue, pro-family conservatives who are the collective backbone of the GOP. Socially liberal Republicans whine about “tone” and “tenor” and the alleged harshness of the “religious right,” but I find that it is often the “moderates” who are cutthroat and even nasty in their dealings with religious conservatives in the party.

I don’t know who I will support for the GOP nomination in 2012, or even if Sarah Palin is running.  I hope she does. Palin has earned respect for her accomplishments and her generally principled, conservative positions and she should not be written off as some Republicans like Brooks are doing. Besides, anyone who has taken the hits that she has from the Left deserves a certain degree of appreciation — something the tone-deaf Brooks might have considered if only to keep from losing his truly conservative readers.

Yes, Palin certainly has all the right enemies — including snotty New York Times opinion writers who cheerlead for homosexual “marriage” as a moral — even a “sacred” — cause.

Brooks Backs Buggery

It’s funny. Just before I learned of Brooks’ rash and gratuitous slam on Palin, I stumbled upon a quotation of his that appeared in a booklet put out by the Human Rights Campaign — a powerful homosexual lobby organization — titled, “Answers to Questions about Marriage Equality.” HRC identifies Brooks as a “conservative columnist,” but no true “conservative” worth his salt gets cited favorably by a “gay” activist group that traffics in the worst kind of hateful, anti-Christian bigotry — and that spends millions of dollars every year electing mostly pro-homosexual-agenda and pro-abortion-on-demand Democrats. (HRC also backs a few socially left Republicans like Illinois’ Congresswoman Judy Biggert to create the appearance of bipartisanship.)

Here’s the Brooks’ quote cited by HRC (on page 13) from his November 22, 2003 column in the New York Times, “The Power of Marriage”:

We shouldn’t just allow gay marriage. We should insist on gay marriage. We should regard it as scandalous that two people could claim to love each other and not want to sanctify their love with marriage and fidelity.

Below is the full context of that quotation from Brooks’ 2003 column; this excerpt follows the contrast that he commendably draws between the noble “culture of fidelity” and the selfish “culture of contingency,” in which men flake out of their marital pledge like some “easily canceled contract.” He writes (emphasis added):

Still, even in this time of crisis, every human being in the United States has the chance to move from the path of contingency to the path of marital fidelity — except homosexuals. Gays and lesbians are banned from marriage and forbidden to enter into this powerful and ennobling institution. A gay or lesbian couple may love each other as deeply as any two people, but when you meet a member of such a couple at a party, he or she then introduces you to a ”partner,” a word that reeks of contingency.

You would think that faced with this marriage crisis, we conservatives would do everything in our power to move as many people as possible from the path of contingency to the path of fidelity. But instead, many argue that gays must be banished from matrimony because gay marriage would weaken all marriage. A marriage is between a man and a woman, they say. It is women who domesticate men and make marriage work.

Well, if women really domesticated men, heterosexual marriage wouldn’t be in crisis. In truth, it’s moral commitment, renewed every day through faithfulness, that ”domesticates” all people.

Some conservatives may have latched onto biological determinism (men are savages who need women to tame them) as a convenient way to oppose gay marriage. But in fact we are not animals whose lives are bounded by our flesh and by our gender. We’re moral creatures with souls, endowed with the ability to make covenants, such as the one Ruth made with Naomi: ‘‘Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried.”

The conservative course is not to banish gay people from making such commitments. It is to expect that they make such commitments. We shouldn’t just allow gay marriage. We should insist on gay marriage. We should regard it as scandalous that two people could claim to love each other and not want to sanctify their love with marriage and fidelity.

When liberals argue for gay marriage, they make it sound like a really good employee benefits plan. Or they frame it as a civil rights issue, like extending the right to vote.

Marriage is not voting. It’s going to be up to conservatives to make the important, moral case for marriage, including gay marriage. Not making it means drifting further into the culture of contingency, which, when it comes to intimate and sacred relations, is an abomination.

Here Brooks, though ostensibly on the right, evinces the Social Lefts’ disdain for biblically-based morality — and its penchant for stealing religious terminology and using sloppy, politically driven exegesis to advance a man- (not God-) centered agenda in the name of piety.

Not bound by our gender? Is Brooks a guest-lecturer in the Women’s Studies Department at Smith College? Whatever  happened to the truth of Genesis — of man and woman as God’s distinctive and complementary creations — as echoed by Jesus Christ:

“And He answered and said to [the Pharisees], ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said,  ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and  the two shall become one flesh’? — Matthew 19:4 (NKJV)

Yes, God created two “genders” (sexes) — not five or seven or whatever the number claimed by radicals is these days.

Homosexualizing Holy Scripture?

And why did Brooks’ choose the biblical example of Ruth and Naomi for his dubious proposition, anyway?  In the biblical account, Naomi was Ruth’s mother-in-law, and the devoted Ruth (a “woman of excellence”) went on to marry Boaz — so what does this noble relationship between two women have to do with homosexual “marriage”? In fact, although Brooks lacked the guts to come right out and say so, his allusion to the Book of Ruth is a mischievous sop to activist, homosexuality-affirming theologians who twist the Bible to claim that Ruth and Naomi were lesbian lovers [see the Human Rights Campaign's self-serving "Out in Scripture" interpretation of Ruth and Naomi's relationship HERE].

Thus Brooks joins the homosexualists in sexualizing and perverting a wonderful story about selfless love and faithfulness in a desperate attempt to legitimize sinful behavior. By including this nonsensical, “queer” theological misinterpretation of Scripture — which is rejected by the vast majority of serious Bible scholars — Brooks demonstrates his profound ignorance of theology and insensitivity toward pious Jews and Christians. He owes all Bible believers an apology, but as a mere Christian in flyover country (who doesn’t hate Sarah Palin) I’m not holding my breath.

Sacred Sodomy?

Brooks continues in his sophistic folly. He views the prohibition of homosexual “marriage” as scandalous when an intellectually honest reading of Scripture would lead us to declare it “scandalous” to attach marriage — the model of the relationship between Jesus Christ and his Church — to deviant relationships whose “love” is expressed by acts of homosexual sodomy clearly condemned as “detestable” by our loving Creator.

God created sex as the sublime expression of love, unity and commitment between husband and wife, for the purpose of procreation — that is, filling the earth with humankind. In contrast, two men attempting a sexual union produces … disease. The plain truth of the Bible is that secular liberals hate is that homosexual (erotic) love is always illegitimate — the outworking not of “sexual orientation” but the sinful orientation with which each human being struggles. The Old Testament prophet Jeremiah’s words about our deceitful hearts are relevant here. Tough love dictates that we uphold God’s truth about homosexual sin while reaching out with the love of Christ to those who struggle with this sin.

Nature clearly discriminates against homosexuality and, by extension, the oxymoronic notion of “gay marriage.” What larger purpose does anal sodomy serve — with its many health hazards? Can two women produce children without borrowing from heterosexuality? (So much for “equality” — and please, don’t even go there with the silly analogy between homosexual and normal, albeit infertile, couples: the latter do not model aberrant, immoral conduct. Rather, they only seek the blessing of children that their opposite-sex union would normally provide.)

Moving toward his dramatic conclusion, Brooks cavalierly implies that homosexual “intimacy” can be “sacred.” But such a claim begs the question: who defines sacred and what is sacredness? Who determines moral right from wrong?  Christians believe that a holy God defines moral truth and reveals it to man through his divinely inspired Word, the Bible. The Bible is the gold standard of moral authority and Truth — which is why the Homosexual Lobby, as the latest in a long line of rebels, is working so hard to undermine it and distort its teachings. (One HRC staffer, Harry Knox — who also sits on President Obama’s  “Faith Advisory Council” — defiantly declares that “being gay or lesbian is an immutable, unchangeable gift from God, one for which I am very grateful. And it would fly in the face of my respect for God to give that gift back.”)

Harry is playing with fire and needs to repent: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20).

Here we must go to Noah Webster’s original 1828 “American Dictionary of the English Language” definition of “sacred,” which avoids the liberal corruption that associates the word with anything “spiritual” (including homosexualized religion):

SACRED, a …from L. sacer, sacred, holy …The sense is removed or separated from that which is common, vulgar, polluted …

1. Holy; pertaining to God or to his worship; separated from common secular uses and consecrated to God and his service.
2. Proceeding from God and containing religious precepts …;
3. Narrating or writing facts respecting God and holy things ….

Note that far from keeping the truly sacred things separate from the corruption of the world, Brooks and other fellow travelers with the “Gay” Lobby are intentionally corrupting the sacred by attempting to fuse it with sin. In their pride, they seek to create a New Morality based upon their own foolish ideas (of which “gay pride” is one). Insidiously, the most radical manifestation of “queer” activism is not the high-heeled drag queens marching down city streets every June — but the “conservative,” domesticated version of homosexual activism that redefines and dumbs down noble institutions like marriage and family — and Truth itself — to the point where words have no meaning.

Besides, even in their gut most people recognize that there’s something deeply wrong with homosexual acts: why else would we cringe at the thought inspired by this question: How do two men consummate their “same-sex marriage”?

Yuck. Behavior — not politically charged abstractions like “gay identity,” is the issue.

Sodomy is not sacred. Sodomy is sin. Homosexual behavior cannot be “sanctified” because it is directly opposed to God’s revealed will and His moral law, as confirmed by thousands of years of Judeo-Christian tradition. Thankfully, many men and women have found freedom from this destructive lifestyle through the healing power of Jesus Christ — but something tells me that David Brooks will not be writing a sympathetic column about happy and successful former homosexuals anytime soon. (If he did, would the Times run it?)

One last turn of the knife

But wait. It’s not over: Brooks saves his most obnoxious “gotcha” assault on biblical morality for his final sentence — proclaiming it an “abomination” for conservatives NOT to make the “moral” case for “gay marriage.”

What is it about secular, big-city elitists like Brooks that they are driven not only to redefine historic morality, but in so doing they appropriate the language of the divine to define deviancy up (to quote Charles Krauthammer)? Is it because — even though they regard ancient moral norms like keeping sex limited to marriage as quaint anachronisms –  they understand the power of traditional religion to define right and wrong authoritatively, even in this jaded modern era?

My Open Bible (Nelson: 1985; NASB) lists passages about “abominations” as “things utterly repulsive.” Is David Brooks really suggesting that it is “repulsive” to God for his followers to resist cloaking detestable behaviors like homosexual sodomy — which God condemns — in the beautiful robe He created called “marriage”?

Indeed, he is, but cheap rhetorical gimmicks make bad theology. The New Liberal “Morality” is bankrupt and has no compelling, divine authority — I’d use an Emperor-Has-No-Clothes reference but it hits too close to home. Therefore it must steal the words of holy revelation to feign legitimacy. Just as two domesticated homosexual lovers with their adopted child are playing house (to quote my ex-”gay” friend Steve Bennett), social liberals like Brooks who exploit holy words of old to promote trendy sins are playing church.

And boy do they love to “preach” their hollow, false “gospel” without boundaries to Americans, even as they ridicule our appeals to a Higher Authority for moral guidance.

So my message to Sarah Palin and all victims of Christian-bashing is this: don’t let social leftists — even those on the “Right” — get you down. Wear their derision as a badge of honor. In fact, take the fight to them and aggressively defend the old truths while tearing down their rootless, fake “morality” that preposterously elevates sin as “sacred.” You can even quote your Bible if you really want to drive the elitists nuts! Because, to paraphrase Brooks, when secularized liberals, libertarians and media pundits attempt to redefine moral Truth by manipulating and distorting the language of faith, it’s really hard to take them seriously.

Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.
Let all that you do be done in love. (1 Corinthians 16:13-14; NASB)

__________________________________

Peter LaBarbera is president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality and an evangelical Christian.

Here’s the YouTube of the ABC “This Week” episode in which David Brooks attacks Sarah Palin:

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
__________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                        October 10, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN DINNER

Walter E. Convention Center
Washington, D.C.
8:10 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, everybody. Please, you’re making me blush. (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: We love you, Barack!

THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. (Applause.)

To Joe Solmonese, who’s doing an outstanding job on behalf of HRC. (Applause.) To my great friend and supporter, Terry Bean, co-founder of HRC. (Applause.) Representative Patrick Kennedy. (Applause.) David Huebner, the Ambassador-designee to New Zealand and Samoa. (Applause.) John Berry, our Director of OPM, who’s doing a great job. (Applause.) Nancy Sutley, Chairman of Council on Environmental Quality. (Applause.) Fred Hochberg, Chairman of Export-Import Bank. (Applause.) And my dear friend, Tipper Gore, who’s in the house. (Applause.)

Thank you so much, all of you. It is a privilege to be here tonight to open for Lady GaGa. (Applause.) I’ve made it. (Laughter.) I want to thank the Human Rights Campaign for inviting me to speak and for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard in their jobs and care deeply about their families — and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. (Applause.)

For nearly 30 years, you’ve advocated on behalf of those without a voice. That’s not easy. For despite the real gains that we’ve made, there’s still laws to change and there’s still hearts to open. There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors, even loved ones — good and decent people — who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; who would deny you the rights most Americans take for granted. And that’s painful and it’s heartbreaking. (Applause.) And yet you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make, and by the power of the example that you set in your own lives — as parents and friends, as PTA members and church members, as advocates and leaders in your communities. And you’re making a difference.

That’s the story of the movement for fairness and equality, and not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who’ve been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship — (applause) — for all 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 with little influence or power; by men and women who brought about change through quiet, personal acts of compassion — and defiance — wherever and whenever they could.

It’s the story of the Stonewall protests, when a group of citizens — (applause) — when a group of citizens with few options, and fewer supporters stood up against discrimination and helped to inspire a movement. 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; who continue to fight this scourge; and who have demonstrated before the world that different kinds of families can show the same compassion in a time of need. (Applause.) And it’s the story of the Human Rights Campaign and the fights you’ve fought for nearly 30 years: helping to elect candidates who share your values; standing against those who would enshrine discrimination into our Constitution; advocating on behalf of those living with HIV/AIDS; and fighting for progress in our capital and across America. (Applause.)

This story, this fight continue now. And I’m here with a simple message: I’m here with you in that fight. (Applause.) For even as we face extraordinary challenges as a nation, we cannot — and we will not — put aside issues of basic equality. I greatly appreciate the support I’ve received from many in this room. I also appreciate that many of you don’t believe progress has come fast enough. I want to be honest about that, because it’s important to be honest among friends.

Now, I’ve said this before, I’ll repeat it again — it’s not for me to tell you to be patient, any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African Americans petitioning for equal rights half a century ago. (Applause.) But I will say this: We have made progress and we will make more. And I think it’s important to remember that there is not a single issue that my administration deals with on a daily basis that does not touch on the lives of the LGBT community. (Applause.) We all have a stake in reviving this economy. We all have a stake in putting people back to work. We all have a stake in improving our schools and achieving quality, affordable health care. We all have a stake in meeting the difficult challenges we face in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Applause.)

For while some may wish to define you solely by your sexual orientation or gender identity alone, you know — and I know — that none of us wants to be defined by just one part of what makes us whole. (Applause.) You’re also parents worried about your children’s futures. You’re spouses who fear that you or the person you love will lose a job. You’re workers worried about the rising cost of health insurance. You’re soldiers. You are neighbors. You are friends. And, most importantly, you are Americans who care deeply about this country and its future. (Applause.)

So I know you want me working on jobs and the economy and all the other issues that we’re dealing with. But my commitment to you is unwavering even as we wrestle with these enormous problems. And while progress may be taking longer than you’d like as a result of all that we face — and that’s the truth — do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach. (Applause.)

My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians — whether in the office or on the battlefield. (Applause.) You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman. (Applause.) You will see a nation that’s valuing and cherishing these families as we build a more perfect union — a union in which gay Americans are an important part. I am committed to these goals. And my administration will continue fighting to achieve them.

And there’s no more poignant or painful reminder of how important it is that we do so than the loss experienced by Dennis and Judy Shepard, whose son Matthew was stolen in a terrible act of violence 11 years ago. In May, I met with Judy — who’s here tonight with her husband — I met her in the Oval Office, and I promised her that we were going to pass an inclusive hate crimes bill — a bill named for her son. (Applause.)

This struggle has been long. Time and again we faced opposition. Time and again, the measure was defeated or delayed. But the Shepards never gave up. (Applause.) They turned tragedy into an unshakeable commitment. (Applause.) Countless activists and organizers never gave up. You held vigils, you spoke out, year after year, Congress after Congress. The House passed the bill again this week. (Applause.) And I can announce that after more than a decade, this bill is set to pass and I will sign it into law. (Applause.)

It’s a testament to the decade-long struggle of Judy and Dennis, who tonight will receive a tribute named for somebody who inspired so many of us — named for Senator Ted Kennedy, who fought tirelessly for this legislation. (Applause.) And it’s a testament to the Human Rights Campaign and those who organized and advocated. And it’s a testament to Matthew and to others who’ve been the victims of attacks not just meant to break bones, but to break spirits — not meant just to inflict harm, but to instill fear. Together, we will have moved closer to that day when no one has to be afraid to be gay in America. (Applause.) When no one has to fear walking down the street holding the hand of the person they love. (Applause.)

But we know there’s far more work to do. We’re pushing hard to pass an inclusive employee non-discrimination bill. (Applause.) For the first time ever, an administration official testified in Congress in favor of this law. Nobody in America should be fired because they’re gay, despite doing a great job and meeting their responsibilities. It’s not fair. It’s not right. We’re going to put a stop to it. (Applause.) And it’s for this reason that if any of my nominees are attacked not for what they believe but for who they are, I will not waver in my support, because I will not waver in my commitment to ending discrimination in all its forms. (Applause.)

We are reinvigorating our response to HIV/AIDS here at home and around the world. (Applause.) We’re working closely with the Congress to renew the Ryan White program and I look forward to signing it into law in the very near future. (Applause.) We are rescinding the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status. (Applause.) The regulatory process to enact this important change is already underway. And we also know that HIV/AIDS continues to be a public health threat in many communities, including right here in the District of Columbia. Jeffrey Crowley, the Director of the Office of National AIDS Policy, recently held a forum in Washington, D.C., and is holding forums across the country, to seek input as we craft a national strategy to address this crisis.

We are moving ahead on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. (Applause.) We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve this country. We should be celebrating their willingness to show such courage and selflessness on behalf of their fellow citizens, especially when we’re fighting two wars. (Applause.)

We cannot afford to cut from our ranks people with the critical skills we need to fight any more than we can afford — for our military’s integrity — to force those willing to do so into careers encumbered and compromised by having to live a lie. So I’m working with the Pentagon, its leadership, and the members of the House and Senate on ending this policy. Legislation has been introduced in the House to make this happen. I will end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. That’s my commitment to you. (Applause.)

It is no secret that issues of great concern to gays and lesbians are ones that raise a great deal of emotion in this country. And it’s no secret that progress has been incredibly difficult — we can see that with the time and dedication it took to pass hate crimes legislation. But these issues also go to the heart of who we are as a people. Are we a nation that can transcend old attitudes and worn divides? Can we embrace our differences and look to the hopes and dreams that we share? Will we uphold the ideals on which this nation was founded: that all of us are equal, that all of us deserve the same opportunity to live our lives freely and pursue our chance at happiness? I believe we can; I believe we will. (Applause.)

And that is why — that’s why I support ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country. (Applause.) I believe strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away and passing laws that extend equal rights to gay couples. I’ve required all agencies in the federal government to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as the current law allows. And I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act. (Applause.) And we must all stand together against divisive and deceptive efforts to feed people’s lingering fears for political and ideological gain.

For the struggle waged by the Human Rights Campaign is about more than any policy we can enshrine into law. It’s about our capacity to love and commit to one another. It’s about whether or not we value as a society that love and commitment. It’s about our common humanity and our willingness to walk in someone else’s shoes: to imagine losing a job not because of your performance at work but because of your relationship at home; to imagine worrying about a spouse in the hospital, with the added fear that you’ll have to produce a legal document just to comfort the person you love — (applause) — to imagine the pain of losing a partner of decades and then discovering that the law treats you like a stranger. (Applause.)

If we are honest with ourselves we’ll admit that there are too many who do not yet know in their lives or feel in their hearts the urgency of this struggle. That’s why I continue to speak about the importance of equality for LGBT families — and not just in front of gay audiences. That’s why Michelle and I have invited LGBT families to the White House to participate in events like the Easter Egg Roll — because we want to send a message. (Applause.) And that’s why it’s so important that you continue to speak out, that you continue to set an example, that you continue to pressure leaders — including me — and to make the case all across America. (Applause.)

So, tonight I’m hopeful — because of the activism I see in this room, because of the compassion I’ve seen all across America, and because of the progress we have made throughout our history, including the history of the movement for LGBT equality.

Soon after the protests at Stonewall 40 years ago, the phone rang in the home of a soft-spoken elementary school teacher named Jeanne Manford. It was 1:00 in the morning, and it was the police. Now, her son, Morty, had been at the Stonewall the night of the raids. Ever since, he had felt within him a new sense of purpose. So when the officer told Jeanne that her son had been arrested, which was happening often to gay protesters, she was not entirely caught off guard. And then the officer added one more thing, “And you know, he’s homosexual.” (Laughter.) Well, that police officer sure was surprised when Jeanne responded, “Yes, I know. Why are you bothering him?” (Applause.)

And not long after, Jeanne would be marching side-by-side with her son through the streets of New York. She carried a sign that stated her support. People cheered. Young men and women ran up to her, kissed her, and asked her to talk to their parents. And this gave Jeanne and Morty an idea.

And so, after that march on the anniversary of the Stonewall protests, amidst the violence and the vitriol of a difficult time for our nation, Jeanne and her husband Jules — two parents who loved their son deeply — formed a group to support other parents and, in turn, to support their children, as well. At the first meeting Jeanne held, in 1973, about 20 people showed up. But slowly, interest grew. Morty’s life, tragically, was cut short by AIDS. But the cause endured. Today, the organization they founded for parents, families, and friends of lesbians and gays — (applause) — has more than 200,000 members and supporters, and has made a difference for countless families across America. And Jeanne would later say, “I considered myself such a traditional person. I didn’t even cross the street against the light.” (Laughter.) “But I wasn’t going to let anybody walk over Morty.” (Applause.)

That’s the story of America: of ordinary citizens organizing, agitating and advocating for change; of hope stronger than hate; of love more powerful than any insult or injury; of Americans fighting to build for themselves and their families a nation in which no one is a second-class citizen, in which no one is denied their basic rights, in which all of us are free to live and love as we see fit. (Applause.)

Tonight, somewhere in America, a young person, let’s say a young man, will struggle to fall to sleep, wrestling alone with a secret he’s held as long as he can remember. Soon, perhaps, he will decide it’s time to let that secret out. What happens next depends on him, his family, as well as his friends and his teachers and his community. But it also depends on us — on the kind of society we engender, the kind of future we build.

I believe the future is bright for that young person. For while there will be setbacks and bumps along the road, the truth is that our common ideals are a force far stronger than any division that some might sow. These ideals, when voiced by generations of citizens, are what made it possible for me to stand here today. (Applause.) These ideals are what made it possible for the people in this room to live freely and openly when for most of history that would have been inconceivable. That’s the promise of America, HRC. That’s the promise we’re called to fulfill. (Applause.) Day by day, law by law, changing mind by mind, that is the promise we are fulfilling.

Thank you for the work you’re doing. God bless you. God bless America. (Applause.)

END 8:35 P.M. EDT

Close down the gay sex clubs? Homosexual sex is dangerous — the CDC says “gay” and “bi” men are 50 times more likely than other groups to have HIV. And yet homosexual sex clubs flourish across the country. At left is Steamworks, a Chicago homosexual bathhouse where men go for anonymous sex with other men. This is a photo taken at the 2005 “Market Days” street fair, at which Steamworks advertises itself like any other business. Why doesn’t the government move to close down such perversion centers as public health hazards, given the overwhelming evidence of the dangers of male homosexual sex? 

____________________

So much for gay “equality.” The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — the U.S. government agency tasked with guarding Americans’ health — has finally put a number on the massively increased HIV risk associated with “men who have sex with men” (MSM): “gay” and “bi” men are 50 times more likely to have HIV. This does not mean that the Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, will take some tough, politically incorrect steps necessary to prevent AIDS — like closing down homosexual bathhouses and gay (male) sex clubs in major cities, and educating teenagers on the hugely disproportionate health risks associated with homosexual sex. The relentless pandering by federal, state and local governments to “gay” activists even as these same agencies fight diseases specifically linked to homosexual sex is one of the greatest public policy follies of our time — indeed, of history itself.

The issue in this ongoing “culture war” is not the cause of homosexual “orientation” — or merely the legality of “same-sex marriage.” It’s homosexual behavior itself — and whether government should promote it or discourage it, or be neutral. I say discourage it, since the evidence keeps pouring in that conduct which has been proscribed as immoral down through centuries of Judeo-Christian tradition is also highly dangerous. Now if the CDC will only stop blabbering on about “homophobia” and start telling the truth — that the rectum is not a sexual organ, after all, and that we must take tough measures against “gay” promiscuity — America will become a healthier place. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.com

The following is excerpted from the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade:

_______________________________

Gay, Bi Men 50 Times More Likely to Have HIV

CDC reports hard data at National HIV Prevention Conference

By DYANA BAGBY, Washington Blade
Aug. 28, 2009

ATLANTA — Gay and bisexual men account for half of new HIV infections in the U.S. and have AIDS at a rate more than 50 times greater than other groups, according to Centers for Disease Control & Prevention data presented at the National HIV Prevention Conference this week in Atlanta.

Dr. Amy Lansky of the CDC presented research at the Aug. 24 plenary in which the CDC estimated in the U.S. there were 692.2 new HIV cases in 2007 per 100,000 men who have sex with men.

While the CDC data has continually reported gay and bisexual men and other MSM of all races as the groups with the highest numbers of new HIV cases each year, AIDS activists said this was the first time the CDC clearly stated with a concrete rate how the disease is impacting gay and bisexual men. Gay and bisexual men are also the only risk group in which new infections are increasing.

“They have never converted the numbers into a rate,” said Walt Senterfitt of the Community HIV/AIDS Mobilization Project. Senterfitt is an epidemiologist.

“It’s not like this is totally new information. But they are saying now that gay, bisexual and other MSM are 50 times more likely to have AIDS than women and non-gay or bisexual men. This is a new statement. We weren’t able to make that equivalent before. We can now compare apples to apples. We represent the largest proportion.”

The CDC estimates gay and bisexual men make up about four to six percent of the population. When the CDC reports on African-American women, it says black women have an HIV infection rate that is nearly 15 times higher than that of white women. And Hispanics, who make up about 13 percent of the U.S. population, account for 17 percent of all new HIV infections in the U.S. each year, according to the CDC.

According to a 2006 CDC report, 13,230 white MSM were estimated to be newly infected with HIV, followed by African-American MSM at 10,130 and then black heterosexual women at 7,340 new infections. The CDC estimates more than 56,000 Americans become infected each year; throughout the HIV Prevention Conference, the CDC stressed that number represents one person every nine-and-a-half minutes.

“If you ask 10 people in this room,” Senterfitt said at the conference with hundreds of people in attendance, “it’s likely only one person will answer correctly [that white MSM are the hardest hit by HIV].

“I think the CDC is finally trying to put out accurate information so the community can collectively respond — and these numbers help to show that HIV/AIDS never left the gay community.”

Kevin Fenton, director of the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD & TB Prevention at the CDC, said in opening remarks at the conference Aug. 23 that “gay and bisexual men account for half of new infections and are at greatest risk.”

But Fenton, who is gay, also noted that just 20 percent of gay and bisexual men report hearing of HIV prevention campaigns.

President Barack Obama’s new Office of National AIDS Policy has the mission of putting HIV/AIDS in the U.S. back on the radar after, as many speakers said at the conference, the country has become complacent about the disease. …. [continued on Blade website]

Click HERE to read the entire article in the “gay” newspaper, Washington Blade