Karen Norling

By Karen Norling, for Americans For Truth

I’d like to tell you about three of my longtime friends–David, Marcia, and Sean–as well as my “double” cousin, Michael, and one of my college professors, Prof. Hathaway.

David entered my life in 1974, shortly after he befriended my older brother, Jon. I was 10; David was 13. Even if David hadn’t become my foster brother, he still would have been a “brother” to me.  I’ll never forget the mornings we walked to the bus stop together, amidst the sub-zero chill of Michigan’s December, the sun-bathed breezes of May. Neither will I forget our unabashed moments of silliness, nor the seriousness with which we debated the issues of the day. Though we’ve lived nearly 3,000 miles apart for many, many years, due to my having moved to California in 1982, we are as close as ever in our hearts.

Marcia entered my life, and became my dear friend, in 1978.  She may have been nearly as old my mother, but that never mattered to me–or to her. Much to my delight, she quickly developed an interest in my poetry and even to this day asks me to send her copies of my latest work. Despite the miles that have separated us for more than three decades, we think of each other often and continue to keep in touch.

Sean entered my life in 1983, when I attended West Valley College in Saratoga. He was my assigned creative-writing tutor.  Sean is one of the most compassionate, considerate men I’ve ever known. My relationship with him is very special, for it is based on trust, respect, and steadfast encouragement: we trust each other to keep one another’s “confidences”; we respect each other’s opinions–even when we staunchly disagree; and we encourage each other, honestly, to spend the rest of our (earthly) lives realizing our God-given potential.

My “double” cousin, Michael, was born six years before I was, but I can remember his side-splitting antics all the way back to first grade.  I could hardly wait to see him whenever I learned that he and his brothers were coming for a visit.  Indeed, he never ceased to make me laugh from the moment he arrived to the moment he said “goodbye.”  If only he had lived closer and could have come more often, I could have spent that much more of my childhood “rolling” joyously on the proverbial “floor.”

Professor Hathaway entered my life in 1990–while I was working toward my Bachelor’s at Cal. State, Stanislaus. She was unusually engaging in front of the class and expected each of her students to work as hard as they could to obtain the highest grades possible.  As such, she taught me a great deal about writing–in only one semester.

Why have I told you about David, Marcia, Sean, Michael and Prof. Hathaway?  I’ve told you about them because they have something in common: they are homosexuals.

Of course, the fact that they are homosexuals would mean nothing to you–if not for the following fact: I am utterly, 100 percent opposed to homosexuality.  I not only think it’s unnatural, I think it’s morally wrong, and the thought of it repulses me.  Now, if you’re thinking that because I disavow homosexuality, I can’t possibly be friends with homosexuals, can’t love them deeply, can’t enjoy their company, can’t admire their intellect–i.e., if you think my “disavowal” renders me a “homophobe”-=think again.

I may be at odds with homosexuality, but I am not afraid of it.  Rather, I’m afraid of losing someone close to me; of walking into a grocery store or restaurant and having my head blown off; of getting into a wreck on the freeway and ending up a paraplegic.  I’m afraid of being told I have some fatal disease that’s going to cause me a slow and painful death, and, yes, I confess, I’m afraid of bumblebees.

Granted, when I was young and going through all the physical/emotional changes an adolescent/teenager inevitably goes through, I did fear homosexuality.  I did wonder, with deep and silent horror, if someday I’d find I was attracted to women instead of men.  Why did I “wonder with horror”?  Why did I fear?  Because, as I just said: the thought of two people of the same sex doing with each other what two people of the opposite sex (innately) do, flat-out repulsed me.

The thing is, however, my sense of fear quickly dissipated–unlike my sense of repulsion–amid my growing desire to forge an intimate relationship with someone outside my gender.  (Please note: this fear I speak of never caused me to withdraw or shy away from David, Marcia, Sean, Michael or Ms. Hathoway.)

Today I am extremely happy, totally satisfied with the man I married nearly 20 years ago.  I mention I’m happy and satisfied because it’s apparent that those of you who make liberal use of the terms “homophobia,” “homophobic,” “homophobe” are trying to imply not only that we who oppose homosexuality are mean, hateful, unenlightened, narrow-minded clods–but also that we’re denying ourselves infinite pleasure and fulfillment–all because we choose to have sex solely with members of the opposite sex.

By frequently employing such terms, you merely sabotage your efforts to make certain homosexuality is ultimately sanctioned by those of us who would strike it from existence if we could.  Hence, I kindly, yet candidly, say: if you truly want to draw us closer to you, instead of pushing us further and further away–relinquish your cocky, condescending attitudes; dismount your “gay-pride” pedestals, and pluck from your verbal “repertoire” every “homophobic” cliche.  Love us whether or not we condone your lifestyle choices, whether or not we share your sexual point of view.

Homosexuality has never stood between me, David, Marcia, Sean, Michael or Prof Hathoway.  Why should it stand between me and you?

________________________

Karen Norling is a writer and conservative activist formerly from California, who now lives with her husband in Ohio.

Dr. Michael Brown, author of "A Queer Thing Happened to America," and one of the world's leading Jewish Christian scholars.

Here is Part One of my interview with Mike Brown [click HERE to listen], perhaps one of the most politically incorrect leaders on the planet. This was pre-recorded and aired April 23rd. Brown, the director of the Coalition of Conscience, based in Charlotte, N.C.,  is author of “A Queer Thing Happened to America,” a new book about the amazing rise in power of organized homosexuality in the United States. Brown, as a Jewish man who believes in Jesus Christ, is also one of the world’s leading authorities on Jewish Christianity. He has engaged in numerous debates with rabbis about the divinity of Jesus, and authored many books on the subject. In this first segment of our in-depth interview, Brown discusses how he came to faith in Jesus Christ after rebelling as a teenager and getting into very heavy drug use. It is a fascinating testimony and a witness to the awesome, redemptive power of God. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

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 attempting to listen 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. 

4-23-11, Michael Brown

First ten questions of the Wright, Adams and Bernat "Homophobia Scale" promoted by PBS. Click to enlarge.

By Peter LaBarbera

Well, I just took the “Homophobia Questionnaire” promoted by PBS’ “Frontline” and it’s official: I am “non-homophobic.” The quiz is called the “Wright, Adams & Bernat Homophobia Scale” and it is — needless to say — biased toward the liberal side on homosexuality. Nevertheless, I “passed” by a comfortable margin – with any score 50 or below registering as “non-homophobic,” and any score 51 or above qualifying as “homophobic.”

Here is Frontline’s description of the test:

In 1996, as part of his study on homophobia, Dr. Henry Adams and his colleagues at the University of Georgia developed their own “Homophobia Scale” by modifying scales used by other researchers in earlier studies. It’s a 25-item questionnaire “designed to measure your thoughts, feelings and behaviors with regards to homosexuality.” The instructions stressed: “It is not a test, so there are no right or wrong answers.”

It should be noted — as we did in reporting pro-family advocates Mat Staver’s and Matt Barber’s “non-homophobic” scores – that we at AFTAH regard the entire concept of “homophobia” as: tendentious; non-scientific; overly-broad, especially due to its ever-expanding application in society (to cover opposition toward rather than irrational fear of homosexuals); subjective; manipulative; and – all too often — a bludgeon with which to demonize and belittle well-meaning opponents of homosexuality (including those motivated by their religion).

The “Homophobia Questionnaire – much like the idea of “homophobia” itself – is flawed. Some of its questions lend themselves toward reliable, straightforward answers (e.g., #12: “Homosexuality is immoral”; or #17: “I have damaged property of a gay person, such as ‘keying’ their car”) – while others are ambiguous and could easily inspire a variety of subjective interpretations. For example, Question 11:

11. It would upset me if I learned that a close friend was homosexual.  [responses range from #1 (Strongly agree to #5 (Strongly disagree)]  

To this question I answered “Strongly Agree” — a response that I assume adds to my “homophobic” quotient. However, even though I would be greatly upset to learn that a good friend or relative considers himself a homosexual (because I believe homosexual practice is sinful and unhealthy), it does not follow that I would reject that person or treat him harshly – or be “fearful” of him, as the term homophobia implies. As I told FOX-Chicago News [see this AFTAH article], if it were one of my children, I would love them as always but would express my opposition to their practice of homosexuality, a sin.

Some questions are vaguely worded, such as #23: “When I see a gay person I think, ‘What a waste.’” 

(The quiz’s creators claim “there are no right or wrong answers” — yet clearly there is a “right” or “favorable” result from the survey: anyone scoring 51 or more is saddled with the “Homophobic” label, which is widely used by LGBT activists and pro-homosexual liberals to discredit those who oppose homosexual activist goals like “same-sex marriage.”)

You can take the “Homophobia Questionnaire” HERE. Send us your results and thoughts regarding its fairness and utility to americansfortruth@gmail.com.

From the Liberty Counsel’s radio program “Faith & Freedom,” January 12, 2011:

The late British neo-Nazi skinhead Nicky Crane was just one of many fascists in Europe who lead a secret double life as a practicing homosexual. Click to enlarge.

By Peter LaBarbera

Warning: offensive language

To nobody’s surprise, homosexual activist Evan Hurst of ‘Truth’ Wins Out supported fellow “gay” blogger Joe Jervis’ sophomoric hit-piece against AFTAH – which draws a crude link between this writer and the KKK.

Jervis was just “stating fact,” protests Hurst, in writing that since the Klan opposed discrimination against a Christian student at Augusta State, and AFTAH also opposes this injustice, then the KKK and I are ”on the same side.” (Juvenile, I know….). [Click HERE to read AFTAH's story on Jennifer Keeton, a victim of homosexualist anti-Christian discrimination.]

OK, Evan, here’s another fact: Jervis, Lambda Legal, you and practically the entire “gay” activist movement are on the same side as NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, with regard to the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on homosexual scoutmasters. (NAMBLA opposes the ban — for obvious reasons.) To paraphrase Hurst:

Eh, again, Evan, all I said was that you, Joe Jervis and NAMBLA (which advocates legalizing man-boy sex) are on the same hateful and child-endangering side.  This is true.

Perhaps this would be a good time for you and Joe, writers for two homosexual hate websites, to reflect on why you find yourselves in such strong agreement with the most notorious pedophile group in American history.

Obviously, such argumentation says nothing about Jervis’ and Hurst’s real attitudes toward NAMBLA (I’m assuming they both oppose the vile outfit), so pointing out that Evan, Joe and NAMBLA are on the same side on the Boy Scouts would be a cheap shot. But since these two homosexual writers attempted to make a connection between AFTAH and odious racists, perhaps they can help us understand why so many homosexuals actually have found their home in the fascist movement. British homosexual writer Johann Hari’s 2008 piece, “The Strange, Strange Story of the Gay Fascists” in the liberal Huffington Post is quite an eye-opener in that regard.

As Hari writes (emphasis added):

This is a taboo topic for a gay left-wing man like me to touch, but there has always been a weird, disproportionate overlap between homosexuality and fascism….

[T]he idea of a gay fascist seems ridiculous. Yet when the British National Party – our own home-grown Holocaust-denying bigots – announced it was fielding an openly gay candidate in the European elections this June, dedicated followers of fascism didn’t blink. The twisted truth is that gay men have been at the heart of every major fascist movement that ever was — including the gay-gassing, homo-cidal Third Reich. With the exception of Jean-Marie Le Pen, all the most high-profile fascists in Europe in the past thirty years have been gay. It’s time to admit something. Fascism isn’t something that happens out there, a nasty habit acquired by the straight boys. It is — in part, at least — a gay thing, and it’s time for non-fascist gay people to wake up and face the marching music.

Just look at our own continent over the past decade. Dutch fascist Pim Fortuyn ran on blatantly racist anti-immigrant platform, describing Islam as “a cancer” and “the biggest threat to Western civilisation today.” Yet with two little fluffy dogs and a Mamma complex, he was openly, flamboyantly gay. When accused by a political opponent of hating Arabs, he replied, “How can I hate Arabs? I sucked one off last night.” …

Flagrant homosexual Ernst Rohm discovered Adolf Hitler.

Hari doesn’t ask but we must: what kind of politician engages in such vulgar and perverse speech? Answer: a sexually deviant one contemptuous of societal norms; yet Fortuyn, who was assassinated in 2002, considered himself a Catholic.

Hari cannot avoid the case of the notorious homosexual Nazi Ernst Rohm, a flagrant homosexual and head of the Nazi storm-troopers who actually “discovered” Hitler (years later, after gaining power, Hitler would have Rohm assassinated). I doubt many American schoolchildren will learn this in their World War II lessons (emphasis and link added):

Along with Adolf Hitler, Rohm was the founding father of Nazism. Born to conservative Bavarian civil servants in 1887, Ernst Rohm’s life began – in his view – in the “heroic” trenches of the First World War. Like so many of the generation who formed the Nazi Party, he was nurtured by and obsessed with the homoerotic myth of the trenches – heroic, beautiful boys prepared to die for their brothers and their country….

It was Rohm who first spotted the potential of a soap-box ranter called Adolf Hitler. He saw him as the demagogue he needed to mobilize support for his plan to overthrow democracy and establish a “soldier’s state” where the army ruled untrammelled. He introduced the young fascist to local politicians and military leaders; they knew him for many years as “Rohm’s boy.” Gay historian Frank Rector notes, “Hitler was, to a substantial extent, Rohm’s protégé.” Rohm integrated Hitler into his underground movement to overthrow the Weimar Republic.

Rohm’s blatant, out homosexuality seems bizarre now, given the gay genocide that was to follow. He talked openly about his fondness for gay bars and Turkish baths, and was known for his virility. He believed that gay people were superior to straights, and saw homosexuality as a key principle of his proposed Brave New Fascist Order. As historian Louis Snyder explains, Rohm “projected a social order in which homosexuality would be regarded as a human behaviour pattern of high repute… He flaunted his homosexuality in public and insisted his cronies do the same. He believed straight people weren’t as adept at bullying and aggression as homosexuals, so homosexuality was given a high premium in the SA [Sturmabteilung (Nazi Stormtroopers)]“ They promoted an aggressive, hypermasculine form of homosexuality, condemning “hysterical women of both sexes,” in reference to feminine gay men.

This belief in the superiority of homosexuality had a strong German tradition that grew up at the turn of the twentieth century around Adolf Brand, publisher of the country’s first gay magazine. You could call it ‘Queer as Volk’: they preached that gay men were the foundation of all nation-states and represented an elite, warrior caste that should rule. They venerated the ancient warrior cults of Sparta, Thebes and Athens.

Rohm often referred to the ancient Greek tradition of sending gay solider couples into battle, because they were believed to be the most ferocious fighters. The famous pass of Thermopylae, for example was held by 300 soldiers – who consisted of 150 gay couples. In its early years, the SA - Hitler and Rohm’s underground army – was seen as predominantly gay. Rohm assigned prominent posts to his lovers, making Edmund Heines his deputy and Karl Ernst the SA commander in Berlin. The organisation would sometimes meet in gay bars. The gay art historian Christian Isermayer said in an interview, “I got to know people in the SA. They used to throw riotous parties even in 1933… I once attended one. It was quite well-behaved but thoroughly gay. But then, in those days, the SA was ultra-gay.”

Gay Nazis Missing from ‘Gay History Month’?

This is not new information. Long before Christian pro-family advocate Scott Lively wrote about it in his book The Pink Swastika, the late historian and former war correspondent William Shirer, in his book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, documented that “sexual perverts” flocked to the National Socialist Party. Hitler himself was potentially a sexual deviant (see Shirer, p. 132, and Lothar Machten’s book Hidden Hitler) – but you won’t see der Führer (or Ernst Rohm) listed in the annual Gay History Month listings of famous homosexuals. Nevertheless, the same outfit that publishes this dubious homosexual list lays claim to others like Cary Grant and George Washington Carver (a committed Christian) — asserting rumor as fact without offering definitive proof that they were practicing homosexuals.

(Grant was married five times and denied the homosexual rumors, which rehash the standard “gay” conflation of male friendship with homoeroticism; former wife Dyan Cannon condemns the gay rumors HERE, saying, “I can tell you there isn’t an iota of truth to those ugly rumors…They would never have written that drivel when Cary was alive. He’d have sued the pants off those cowards…Cary can’t defend himself from the grave but I will go to mine insisting he was every ounce a straight man.” Moral of the story: don’t trust pro-homosexual historians with an agenda.)

One thing I’ve noticed about British homosexual activists: they are more willing to write honestly about homosexuality, including its downsides, than their American counterparts. Hari even alludes to the fascist roots of the pseudo-masculine, homosexual sadomasochistic (“leather”) subculture (the same subculture that rears its hideous head in major cities across the country):

So it’s fairly easy to establish that gay people are not inoculated from fascism. They have often been at its heart. This begs the bigger question: why? How did gay people — so often victims of oppression and hate — become integral to the most hateful and evil political movement of all? …

Gay pornographer and film-maker Bruce LaBruce has one explanation. He claims that “all gay porn today is implicitly fascist. Fascism is in our bones, because it’s all about glorifying white male supremacy and fetishizing domination, cruelty, power and monstrous authority figures.”

Hari takes an obligatory shot at Lively as a “homophobe” — but Lively merely has sought to educate Americans on this same Nazi-homosexuality factor that remains buried in Politically Correct history. It also should be noted that there are plenty of attempts to blame the Nazi-homosexual link — and some male homosexuals’ distorted and exaggerated attempts to act “masculine” — on their repressed, “internalized homophobia.” The implicit, and sometimes explicit, message: like every other “gay” problem, it’s OUR fault.

Extremism and ‘gay’ politics go hand-in-hand

Homosexual radicals’ deranged attempts to link pro-family conservatives to racist fringe groups are part of their larger goal of demonizing and marginalizing “homophobic” Christians and social conservatives. This begs the question: where does extremism find its natural home? In America, sexual extremism and its accompanying intolerance of moral dissent is found mainly on the Left — not the Right — especially in urban, homosexual bastions like San Francisco, and on college campuses, where “hate speech codes” proliferate.

(Moreover, on the racial front, African-American pro-family Christians like Pastor Ken Hutcherson have been the target of racist epithets by (white) homosexual activists — and there has been much discussion of racism within the LGBT movement and efforts to eradicate it. Of course, racism also exists in all other sectors of U.S. society.)

There is something profoundly “queer” about a social movement rooted in an ancient vice attempting to paint defenders of Judeo-Christian civilization and normalcy – marriage, the natural family, and religion — as extreme and hateful. Or even worse, as causing violence against homosexuals, and “gay” suicides. Yet this is the modus operandi of homosexual activists and powerful “gay” lobby groups — who have gone so far as to equate pro-family Christian organizations with the Klan, slavery advocates and the Taliban. The LGBT lobby’s ambitious smear campaign painting Christians and historic Bible passages proscribing same-sex behavior as extreme comes at a cost: it exposes homosexualists’ out-of-the-closet hatred for religious expression.

Meanwhile, there is the factor of the “gay” movement’s tolerance and promotion of an ever-expanding array of perversions and a “sexual freedom” agenda that borders on sexual anarchy. (The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom — an ally of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force — “aims to advance the rights of, and advocate for consenting adults in the BDSM-Leather-Fetish, Swing, and Polyamory Communities.”) If the media were even close to being impartial on this issue, Americans would have a much clearer picture of the radicalism of homosexual and transsexual activists working to use laws to legitimize their lifestyles and oppress religious critics.

Tolerating homosexual pedophilia advocacy?

Perhaps most observers will agree that it doesn’t get more extreme than pedophile advocacy — yet even ideologues in favor of adult-child sex find a voice on the “gay”-affirming Left. Witness the book review in the Marxist publication Monthly Review by David Thorstad, founding member of NAMBLA and former president of the Gay Activist Alliance in New York. In his review of Sexual and Socialism: History, Politics and Theory of LGBT Liberation, by Sherry Wolf, Thorstad complains that Wolf is too tough on adult-child sex:

But by inserting “seduction” into her novel definition of pederasty (a sexual relationship between a man and an adolescent youth), [Wolf] repeats the foolish notion that a boy under the magical age of consent (whatever it happens to be) is by definition incapable of consenting to sex with a man.

How instructive that despite the best efforts of LGBT activists to shed their past tolerance for pedophilia (NAMBLA used to march in “gay pride” parades), pro-pederasty and truly extreme sexual activists and professors — like radical pro-abortion zealots — continue to have intellectual sway with the Left. The same cannot be said of the KKK and neo-Nazis (or sexual perversion activists) vis-a-vis religious conservatives.

Radical Gay ‘Founding Fathers’

Then there are those extremist ”gay” ”founding fathers,” among them:

• Harry Hay, one-time Communist and then “Radical Faerie,” who defended NAMBLA until his dying day (see Thorstad: “Harry Hay on Man/Boy Love”);
• Frank Kameny, a professed atheist who nevertheless claims “gay is godly,” evidently spoke at a NAMBLA meeting (but can’t remember what he said), rails against “Christianofascists” and opines that bestiality is OK “as long as the animal doesn’t mind”; and
• Larry Kramer, founder of the militant protest group ACT UP, who labeled the U.S. Government’s response to AIDS a “Holocaust,” called Ronald Reagan “a monster” who “was responsible for more deaths than Adolf Hitler,” and says he has the proof that Abraham Lincoln was a “totally gay man.”

Reading “gay” iconic history is like reading a (pre-Political Correctness) psychological textbook on the outworking of dysfunction — mixed with a peculiar form of hatred derived from rebelling against God and the Church. Throw in a nearly pathological quest to justify the unjustifiable (embracing deviance and sin as the basis for one’s identity) and what emerges is a powerful personal motive to both hate religious opponents of homosexuality and (for those who do not reject the Creator altogether) to posit that God created and accepts homosexuals as “gays.”

(The resentment toward God and religion theme is pervasive in homosexual writings: see Page 2 of Peter Sprigg’s Family Research Council paper on homosexual activist and Obama Education Department appointee Kevin Jennings, who is “viciously hostile to religion,” writes Sprigg. He quotes Jennings, writing in his autobiography Mama’s Boy, Preacher’s Son, recollecting his thoughts as a younger man: “God . . . had done nothing but cause me pain and anguish through His inaction and malevolence throughout my childhood… What had he done for me, other than make me feel shame and guilt?” Jennings told God: “Screw you, buddy.”)

Pity the poor schoolchildren who one day could be forced to study sanitized versions of these men’s lives during school-sanctioned ”Gay History Month,” if current trends continue. (Note regarding American icons who practiced or struggled with homosexuality: there is a big difference between recognizing them for their accomplishments and contributions to American culture — and politicizing their contribution by making it part of an official celebration of homosexuality. We can appreciate Martina Navratilova’s skill on the tennis court without celebrating her lesbian lifestyle choice.)

Deviance begets deviance

The Sexual Left continues to push the envelope in the name of aberrant “rights” and “sexual freedom” — demonstrating precisely where “gay” tolerance leads. Just last week the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force sponsored a “Poly Pride” conference in New York City. (“Polyamory” is defined by Urban Dictionary as: “The practice, state or ability of having more than one sexual loving relationship at the same time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved.”) A “Queer Sexual Liberation” workshop at the conference was set to “explore many aspects of sexual liberation including: BDSM [bondage & discisplne, dominance & submission, sadism & masochism], Leather, Polyamory, Non-monogomy, sex work [prostitution], and more.”

The Task Force, founded in 1973, is hardly a “fringe” homosexual group but the “oldest national LGBT rights organization in the United States,” according to Wikipedia. It is involved in politics and legislative lobbying across the country. The same dominant media that monitored the Christian Coalition has little interest in the actual record of LGBT groups like the Task Force.

"Fisting Parties" were part of recent "Leather Week" celebrations in San Franciso. Extreme and dangerous practices are not just tolerated under the LGBT umbrella, they are celebrated. Deviance finds its home in Left-dominated urban enclaves.

Deviance begets deviance. Just as the sadistic Nazi Party was a magnet for sexual perverts – wherever government-protected homosexuality flourishes, political and culural radicalism follows. That includes: forcing businesses to subsidize homosexual unions; radicalizing schools to promote “gay” ideology and gender confusion; making ever-increasingly extreme political demands such as taxpayer- and corporate-funded transsexual “sex change” operations; “tolerance” of public nudity (San Francisco) and ”multi-partner unions”; allowing anonymous sex clubs and gay bathhouses catering to the hyper-promiscuous; and government promotion of homosexuality as normal to youth. And let’s not forget the growth of official anti-Christian intolerance — criminalizing Christianity as applied to the issue of homosexuality. Each finds its place under the LGBT umbrella, because revolutionaries bent on destroying and redefining social norms hard a hard time saying no to the latest “progressive” social experiment.

Perhaps the extremism that comes naturally to homosexual militants explains their presence on both the hard, Marxist left and fascist right of the political spectrum. Where they come together is in their abiding contempt for biblical morality and America’s God-fearing, Judeo-Christian heritage — which laid the foundation for our liberties.

To be sure, liberterians of all stripes, sexualities and ideologies often cheer on the ”gays” in supporting a live-and-let-live attitude toward sex, and marriage- and family structures. Libertarians abhor the use of government and laws to uphold “traditional moral values.” However, it is strident pro-homosexual organizations and activists — not libertarians — who are in the vanguard of mobilizing toward a new secular ideology that grants superior legal rights, as it were, to homosexuals. The homosexual legal agenda criminalizes the expression of biblical morality – e.g., a Christian professional photographer’s right not to take pictures at a lesbian commitment ceremony – as merely another form of “anti-gay discrimination” that must be eradicated. Few in the secular media have seriously examined this very real, zero-sum conflict between homosexual activism and religious freedom — and the trampling of Christians’ freedom of conscience and Americans’ civil rights in the name of ‘Gay Tolerance.’

Homo-fascism through the law?

Could the American State become a national, homo-fascist agent? America is not Europe. Due to our much larger population of committed Christians and religious people — and our stronger, First Amendment commitment to individual religious freedom — it is hard to see America going down the road of Canada or Great Britain. These are emerging pro-homosexual, quasi-”police states” where Christians can be arrested (Britain) or sued in rigged state ”human rights tribunals” (Canada) merely for speaking against homosexuality.

Nevertheless, factoring in today’s secular environment and the escalating and extraordinary attacks by U.S. “gay” militants against churches, historic biblical morality and people of faith – including the vilification of Christians [see comments on Jervis' über-hate site HERE] — and it becomes clearer each day that fanatical homosexual militants are serious about creating a government tyranny that enforces their egalitarian agenda of treating homosexuality like normalcy in all spheres of life.  (Legalized homosexual “marriage” accomplishes much of this agenda: e.g., in a “gay marriage” state like Massachusetts, privately-owned businesses and institutions are not allowed to treat homosexual “marrieds” any differently than normal marrieds. This forced Catholic Charities out of the adoption business because church officials could not countenance placing children in homosexual-led households.)

Much as they talk a good game about “respecting” religion, homosexual activists are working towards a government and legal paradigm that crushes religious and moral dissent – all in the name of tolerance, equality, and anti-discrimination. (All oppressive agendas use soft, innocuous-sounding euphemisms.) Their task will become much easier if acceptance of homosexuality becomes widespread in society — even among self-professed biblical Christians — leaving a smaller number of principled, counter-cultural ”holdouts” to target for persecution.

Where will pursuit of this homosexual activist vision lead? Will the courts codify a “soft tyranny” (isn’t that an oxymoron?) in which rights based on homosexuality (“sexual orientation”) — with some religious exemptions – negate Americans’ freedom to live out their faith in their everday lives? Who can know? But we do know that few Germans in the 20′s and 30′s could have envisioned the oppression and evil that was to come only a few years later. We must remain true to the Bible — and vigilant to preserve our genuine God-given freedoms at all costs.

For more on the European homosexual-fascism link, go to Hari’s piece, “The Strange Story of the Gay Fascists.”

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

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

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

By Peter LaBarbera

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A new civil rights movement

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

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

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

__________________________________________

Star-Tribune article on Campion’s victory:

Minneapolis settles suit with fired psychologist for $210,000

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

By ROCHELLE OLSON, Star Tribune

September 3, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rochelle Olson • 612-673-1747

Glenn Beck needs to attend the next AFTAH Truth Academy, says Champion News editor John Biver.

Reprinted with permission from ChampionNews.net; first published August 27, 2010

By John Biver

From coast to coast, platform-supporting Republicans have reacted to Glenn Beck’s weak-kneed cave-in regarding the issue of homosexual “marriage.” He’s quoted as telling Fox News Network’s Bill O’Reilly,

“I believe that Thomas Jefferson said, ‘If it neither breaks my leg, nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me.’”

Some people are even calling for a “moratorium” on the political discussion of the cultural issues. That idea is foolish, as we’ve addressed on links found HERE. Try as you might, you can’t separate economics from culture.

The cultural issues are numerous. They include the proper use of facts when it comes to history, honesty in intellectual debates, integrity in the free market system, standing with our friends and allies in foreign countries, the right of the unborn to not have their life taken through the barbaric procedure of abortion, and decorum that befits a civilization when it comes to matters that should be private such as individual sexual predilections.

The two that get the most attention are abortion and the sexual problems of at best 3 percent of the population: homosexual behavior. I call it a problem because it is. The physical health statistics, sociological data, and psychological evidence reached critical mass a long time ago about the dangers of that behavior choice.

Note that I said behavior choice. If you can’t control your urges, then you should seek help. It’s called mature adulthood. If you think nothing is wrong with homosexual activity, that is your right. It’s not your right to indoctrinate children, force an extreme social agenda on an unwilling country, or demand acceptance from people whose religions refer to that activity as sin and a crime against nature.

We’re not guilty of “homophobia.” They’re guilty of moralityphobia. We don’t fear them – we fear the tearing of the moral fabric. They fear the preservation of common sense moral standards.

Unfortunately too many people within the Republican Party are intellectually lazy and refuse to learn what they should about the real agenda of those pushing homosexual “marriage.”

Champion News has addressed the issue of marriage at some length through links listed on this page. Champion News has also addressed the moral confusion surrounding what I’d refer to as the arrested-development push for amoral sexual behavior in the public square. It’s no longer a private issue; the other side marches in pride parades much like children might march to celebrate having been potty trained.

(One friend has observed: “Although it wouldn’t be appropriate to hold a parade for potty-training in that it’s a private activity, I think being potty-trained—unlike homosexual practice—is a legitimate accomplishment.”)

Glenn Beck needs to go to school on the issue by purchasing the DVDs or CDs of the last Truth Academy put on by Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, and he should attend the next one. There he’ll learn the facts that no one is born gay, its causes are psychological and emotional, the Bible in no way supports or condones homosexual behavior, and that there is no compromise possible between our First Amendment right of freedom of religion and the agenda of those who are seeking to make the American culture into one where sexual morality is tossed out the window.

Speaking of windows, Glenn Beck’s novel The Overton Window is premised on the idea presented by Joseph Overton – here is how Wikipedia sums it up (emphasis added):

“At any given moment, the ‘window’ includes a range of policies considered to be politically acceptable in the current climate of public opinion, which a politician can recommend without being considered too ‘extreme’ or outside the mainstream to gain or keep public office.

“Overton arranged the spectrum on a vertical axis of ‘more free’ and ‘less free’ in regards to government intervention. When the window moves or expands, ideas can accordingly become more or less politically acceptable. The degrees of acceptance of public ideas can be described roughly as: Unthinkable, Radical, Acceptable, Sensible, Popular, Policy.”

I appreciate the good work Glenn Beck is doing on several fronts, but he needs to open his eyes to the cultural Overton Window phenomenon he’s falling prey to when it comes to our nation’s culture. Our second President John Adams gave one of the more succinct quotes from the Founding era about our nation’s survival:

“Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Surely Beck understands that the ethical roots of the American regime have their lineage in both Athens and Jerusalem, and that the religion Adams had in mind was Christianity. Surely Beck realizes the consequences of allowing the sexually troubled to win in their overthrow of the First Amendment. Surely Beck understands that if you surrender to the extreme agenda of the social left on any matter, the Overton Window moves in the wrong direction. Surely Beck realizes that the problems of the 3 percent put at risk the support of the cultural conservative base of the one party – the Republican Party – that still understands that civilization is behavior.

If he doesn’t, he should take some time off from his radio and TV show, his book-writing, rally-planning, and speech-giving – and learn.

John Biver is the Editor of Champion News.

The Gay Liberation Network's Bob Schwartz celebrated U. of Illinois' firing of Catholic professor Kenneth Howell (above) -- strange behavior for a group that crusades against "discrimination."

The homosexual hate group Gay Liberation Network (GLN) — whose co-leader Bob Schwartz celebrated the University of Illinois’ recent firing of Catholic professor Kenneth Howell — has announced that it will protest the AFTAH Truth Academy, which will be held Aug. 5-7 at the Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, Illinois.

GLN is a Marxist-oriented street protest group that attempts to equate Judeo-Christian opposition to homosexuality with “hate” — and which uses its protests to intimidate businesses from hosting pro-family events. For its extreme anti–Christian bigotry and hateful rhetoric — including vicious ad hominem attacks against pro-family critics (e.g., calling AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera “Satan’s Lover”)  – we label GLN a homosexual hate organization.

GLN, formerly the Chicago Anti-Bashing Network, once smeared the historic Moody Church in Chicago as a “House of Hate” because Moody’s revered pastor, Erwin Lutzer, wrote a book critical of “same-sex marriage.” GLN has repeatedly pilloried Chicago’s Catholic leaker Cardinal Francis George with similar accusations because George defends Catholic teachings on sex and marriage.

Beyond that, Schwartz once told LaBarbera — who was protesting a “gay youth” rally in downtown Chicago as then-executive director of Illinois Family Institute – that if it weren’t for the police standing nearby, he would push him into the busy street. (Schwartz has never denied making this comment after it was reported by IFI.) LaBarbera maintains that had such a veiled violent threat been made against a homosexual by a conservative or Christian, it could have been the basis for a criminal charge under Chicago’s ”hate crime” law.

Thus it is a great irony that the nasty GLN played a proud role in lobbying the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center to label AFTAH a “hate site.”

Here is an excerpt of GLN’s ludicrous attempt to distort the Truth Academny’s true purpose:

Youth should not be taught to hate their peers and thus fuel the cycle of self-loathing, depression and suicide which too many LGBTQ youth experience. Bigotry must be vocally and publicly opposed, especially when haters try to recruit young people.

Gay Liberation Network activists specialize in name-calling. Ironically, the Marxist-oriented, Christian-bashing hate group played a role in lobbying the Southern Poverty Law Center to label AFTAH a "hate" website.

Defending historic Judeo-Christian moral truths and the natural family is not “hate.” Teaching young people to revere biblical teachings and God’s natural design for the family — and how to answer GLBT misinformation in the public sphere – is not “bigotry.” However, GLN’s vicious name-calling and ugly condemnations of traditionalists as “haters” — and its regular lies about religious leaders who oppose homosexual practice – is a form of secular, anti-Christian bigotry. This neo-intolerance must be resisted at every turn by the avid participation of pro-family Americans at events like the Truth Academy.

“Peter LaBarbera has unveiled the instructor list and official curriculum for his upcoming three day anti-gay hatefest/”truth academy” … and it is pretty much going to be the gay-hatingest thing you have ever seen.”

Wow. “Gay-hatingest.” Reactionary liberals are expanding their smear-term lexicon. Seriously, though, most people on the Left are not quite willing, yet, to define anyone who disagrees with homosexuality as “hateful” — although they might call them “homophobic” (an artificial construct whose elastic definition has evolved to meet the needs of pro-”gay” liberals). I’m sure there are exceptions, but I suspect that most “gay”-affirming people would not automatically label anyone who believes that homosexuality is immoral — or that homosexual sex is unnatural – as “haters.”

However, if you reflect that moral opposition in the public square — if you defend the age-old position that homosexuality is wrong – then suddenly you become, yes, “hateful.” Hard to win that argument: ME: pro-gay, loving and tolerant. YOU: anti-gay, hateful and intolerant. Is this what now passes for discourse in dumbed-down America? Give me the old-fashioned liberals who might disagree with AFTAH’s beliefs forcefully but who at least understand that name-calliing is no substitute for an argument.

Morality is not “hate” and defending the historic Judeo-Christian sexual ethic is not “bigotry.” Homosexuality is wrong, and a controversial moral and religious issue involving behavior. It is wholly unlike race: there are no “ex-Blacks” or “ex-Asians”; there are thousands of former homosexuals — people like our Truth Academy instructor Greg Quinlan, who once considered himself “gay” before leaving the lifestyle. The evidence is overwhelming that homosexual practice — especially among men — is a big factor in the spread of diseases like HIV. In a free society, we debate moral issues, and we discuss public health issues arising from dangerous behaviors. Does PFAW hold that it is OK to crusade for acceptance of homosexuality, but “un-American” and ”hateful” to oppose it civilly?

Maybe “Senior Fellow” Kyle, who edits PFAW’s “Right-Wing Watch” blog, and his pro-homosexual allies can explain it for us:  Is every American who opposes homosexuality hateful — or just those who defend that position in public? When does moral disagreement become “hate”? (I know, I’m a fool for trying to reason with the Left….)

Meanwhile, below are the Truth Academy curriculum and speakers, not one of whom has a hateful bone in his or her body. Please spread the word on this wonderful opportunity to educate citizens about an activist movment that reveals its own brand of hatred and bigotry – and intellectual bankruptcy — by castigating its critics and Judeo-Christian morality itself as “hateful.” – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

P.S. We’ve just learned that the “loving and tolerant” folks over at (Marxist) Gay Liberation Network — whose intemperate rhetoric might make even PFAW blush (see GLN applauding the firing of a Catholic professor HERE) – are planning to picket the Truth Academy.

___________________________________________

Americans For Truth Academy

Tentative Speakers Schedule

Thursday, August 5 – Saturday, August 7, 2010

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

Cost: Adults: $149 for 3-day conference; Single day rate: $50/day; Married couples discount: $199 for full conference; Youth: $99 (scholarships available to attendees ages 14-25)

Contact info/queries/RSVP: E-mail americansfortruth@gmail.com ; phone: 630-717-7631; more background information HERE.
________________________________________________

THURSDAY

Welcoming Remarks, Peter LaBarbera, President, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality: “From gay pride to gay tyranny”

10:10 – 11:10 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law: “History of modern ‘gay’ activism and the courts”

11:20-12:20 – Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel; Board Member, AFTAH: “Masculine Christianity: a non-defensive approach to the Culture War over homosexuality”

1:20-2:20 – Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California: “The ‘born gay hoax”

2:30 – 3:30 – Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute: “Using reason and logic in answering pro-homosexuality arguments”

3:40-4:40 – Arthur Goldberg, JONAH (Jews Offering Healthy Alternatives to Homosexuality), author, Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change: “Can gays change? Is gay parenting good for kids? Presenting the research on homosexuality”

4:50-6:00 – PANEL DISCUSSION and Q & A:

Theme: “Can the effort to ‘mainstream’ homosexuality in American culture be stopped?”

Panelists: Rena Lindevaldsen, Matt Barber, Laurie Higgins, Ryan Sorba, Arthur Goldberg, and Greg Quinlan, Cliff Kincaid; Moderator: Peter LaBarbera

7:45 – 9:15 – Greg Quinlan, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX); Pro-Family Network: “An Ex-Gay Christian Discusses Love, Truth and Homosexuality”

FRIDAY

9:00 – 10:00 – Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival, Accuracy in Media: “The battle over blood: ‘gay’ health risks and public policy”

10:10 – 11:10 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law: “The zero-sum game: homosexuality-based ‘rights’ vs. religious and First Amendment freedoms”

11:20-12:20 – Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute: “Corrupting children, politicizing schools: the homosexual youth agenda”

1:20-2:20 – Arthur Goldberg, JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality: “The gender confusion agenda: ‘transgender rights’”

2:30 – 3:30 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary: “From abomination to ‘gay’: answering ‘queer theology’ — Old Testament”

3:40-4:40 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty U. School of Law: “The legal strategy to stop homosexual ‘marriage’: triumphs and pitfalls”

5:00-6:00 – PANEL DISCUSSION and Q & A:

Theme: “Returning the debate to behavior – getting off the ‘GLBT’ playing field”

Panelists: Rena Lindevaldsen, Matt Barber, Laurie Higgins, Ryan Sorba, Arthur Goldberg, Cliff Kincaid, Robert Knight, Robert Gagnon, Gregg Quinlan; Moderator: Peter LaBarbera

7:45 – 9:15 – Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries; author, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who Are Pushing America Towards Socialism: “From destroying DOMA to homosexualizing the military: Obama’s radical homosexual/transsexual agenda for America”

SATURDAY

9:00 – 10:00 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary: “’Jesus never said anything about homosexuality’”: answering ‘Queer Theology’ — New Testament”

10:10 – 11:10 – Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries: “Destructive legacy: Alfred Kinsey and the (Homo)Sexual Revolution”

11:20-12:20 – Greg Quinlan, PFOX, Pro-Family Network: “The big, pink plan for a lavender culture”/”How to lobby effectively”

1:20-2:20 – Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival; Accuracy in Media: “Combating pro-homosexual media bias, confronting pro-gay ‘conservatives’”

2:30-3:40 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary: “Agreeing with God: a truly biblical approach toward ‘out and proud’ homosexuality”

3:50-4:50 – Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California: “Confronting the zeitgeist: new strategies to turn around younger Americans on ‘gay rights’”

5:00-6:00 – Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel, AFTAH Board Member: “Don’t Ask, Don’t Bleed: stopping Obama’s campaign to homosexualize the U.S. military”

6:00-6:20 – Closing remarks, Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

Tentative Speakers Schedule

Thursday, August 5 – Saturday, August 7, 2010

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

Cost: Adults: $149 for 3-day conference; Single day rate: $50/day; Married couples discount: $199 for full conference; Youth: $99 (scholarships available to attendees ages 14-25)

Contact info/queries/RSVP: E-mail americansfortruth@gmail.com ; phone: 630-717-7631; more background information HERE.

Truth Academy Instructors:

• Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel ; Board Member, AFTAH
• Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival; Accuracy in Media
• Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, author, The Bible and Homosexual Practice
• Arthur Goldberg, Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality (JONAH), author, Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change
• Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute
• Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries; author, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who Are Pushing America Towards Socialism, keynote presenter
• Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
• Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law
• Greg Quinlan, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX); Pro-Family Network
• Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California

_______________________________________________________

THURSDAY, AUGUST 5 (Day One)

All presentations are 45 minutes followed by 15 minutes of Q & A.  There will be a panel discussion and Q & A on Thursday and Friday, and a special evening presentation each of those evenings.

8-9:30 – Light breakfast;  Registration

9:30 – 10:00 – Opening Prayer, Calvin Lindstrom, pastor, Church of Christian Liberty;

Welcoming Remarks, Peter LaBarbera, President, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality:

“From gay pride to gay tyranny”

10:10 – 11:10 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law:

“History of modern ‘gay’ activism and the courts”

11:20-12:20 – Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel; Board Member, AFTAH:

“Masculine Christianity: a non-defensive approach to the Culture War over homosexuality”

12:20-1:20 – Lunch Break; light lunch provided

1:20-2:20 – Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California:

“The ‘born gay hoax”

2:30 – 3:30 – Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute:

“Using reason and logic in answering pro-homosexuality arguments”

3:40-4:40 – Arthur Goldberg, JONAH (Jews Offering Healthy Alternatives to Homosexuality), author, Light in the Closet: Torah, Homosexuality, and the Power to Change:

“Can gays change? Is gay parenting good for kids? Presenting the research on homosexuality”

4:50-6:00 – PANEL DISCUSSION and Q & A:

Theme:  “Can the effort to ‘mainstream’ homosexuality in American culture be stopped?”

Panelists:  Rena Lindevaldsen, Matt Barber, Laurie Higgins, Ryan Sorba, Arthur Goldberg, and Greg Quinlan, Cliff Kincaid; Moderator: Peter LaBarbera

Special Thursday evening presentation (Q & A will follow talk):

7:45 – 9:15 – Greg Quinlan, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX); Pro-Family Network:

“An Ex-Gay Christian Discusses Love, Truth and Homosexuality”

__________________________________________________________________________

FRIDAY, AUGUST 6 (Day Two)

8:00-9:00 – Light breakfast; Registration

9:00 – 10:00 – Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival, Accuracy in Media:

“The battle over blood: ‘gay’ health risks and public policy”

10:10 – 11:10 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty University School of Law:

“The zero-sum game: homosexuality-based ‘rights’ vs. religious and First Amendment freedoms”

11:20-12:20 – Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute:

“Corrupting children, politicizing schools: the homosexual youth agenda”

12 :20-1:20 – Lunch Break; light lunch provided

1:20-2:20 – Arthur Goldberg, JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality:

“The gender confusion agenda: ‘transgender rights’”

2:30 – 3:30 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary:

“From abomination to ‘gay’: answering ‘queer theology’ — Old Testament”

3:40-4:40 – Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen, Liberty U. School of Law:

“The legal strategy to stop homosexual ‘marriage’: triumphs and pitfalls”

5:00-6:00 – PANEL DISCUSSION and Q & A:

Theme:  “Returning the debate to behavior – getting off the ‘GLBT’ playing field”

Panelists:  Rena Lindevaldsen, Matt Barber, Laurie Higgins, Ryan Sorba, Arthur Goldberg, Cliff Kincaid, Robert Knight, Robert Gagnon, Gregg Quinlan; Moderator: Peter LaBarbera

Special Friday evening keynote presentation (Q & A will follow talk):

7:45 – 9:15 – Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries; author, Radical Rulers: The White House Elites Who Are Pushing America Towards Socialism:

“From destroying DOMA to homosexualizing the military: Obama’s radical homosexual/transsexual agenda for America”

__________________________________________________________

SATURDAY, AUGUST 7 (Day Three)

8:00-9:00 – Light breakfast; Registration

9:00 – 10:00 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary:

“’But Jesus never said anything about homosexuality’”: Answering ‘Queer Theology’ — New Testament”

10:10 – 11:10 – Robert Knight, Coral Ridge Ministries:

“Destructive legacy: Alfred Kinsey and the (Homo)Sexual Revolution”

11:20-12:20 – Greg Quinlan, PFOX, Pro-Family Network:

“The big, pink plan for a lavender culture”/”How to lobby effectively”

12:20-1:20 – Lunch Break; light lunch provided

1:20-2:20 – Cliff Kincaid, America’s Survival; Accuracy in Media:

“Combating pro-homosexual media bias, confronting pro-gay ‘conservatives’”

2:30-3:40 – Prof. Robert Gagnon, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary:

“Agreeing with God: a truly biblical approach toward ‘out and proud’ homosexuality”

3:50-4:50 – Ryan Sorba, Young Conservatives of California:

“Confronting the zeitgeist: new strategies to turn around younger Americans on ‘gay rights’”

5:00-6:00 – Matt Barber, Liberty Counsel, AFTAH Board Member:

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Bleed: stopping Obama’s campaign to homosexualize the U.S. military”

6:00-6:20 – Closing remarks, Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

Ellen DeGeneres is practicing lesbian behavior and she thinks it's OK. Does that give her any moral authority?

Theological/philosophical question for the day:

Is the rightness or wrongness of homosexual behavior dependent upon cultural acceptance of that behavior?

Modern application:

Does the fact that Ellen DeGeneres — a popular comedian, talk show host, and practicing lesbian — thinks homosexuality is OK make it OK?

Corollary question:

Do the condemnations by those who approve of homosexuality of those who do not (as “bigots,” “homophobes,” “haters,” etc.) have any moral authority?

Rephrased:

By what standard and authority is opposition to homosexual behavior deemed “immoral”?

From: Theresa [------------]
To: americansfortruth@comcast.net
Sent: Wed. 11/25/2009  8:30 AM

Subject: What a crock of [sh*t]
_______________________________________

“I think your group is immoral and extremely intolerant for saying that homosexuals are immoral. Who are you to judge these people. They are human beings. Homosexuality is determined in the womb. I\’d say your group is immoral and intolerant and a bunch of homophobes. You make me sick.”

– Theresa, writing via the AFTAH website, November 25, 2009

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

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

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

_______________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you.

Folks, I sent the following e-mail to FOX’s late-night “Red Eye” host Greg Gutfeld, and cc’d to guests Marc Lamont Hill and Monica Crowley:

From:  Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
To:  Greg Gutfeld, host of FOX’s “Red Eye” [redeye@foxnews.com]; (guest) Prof. Marc Lamont Hill; Monica Crowley (FOX commentator and also a guest on that segment)
Date:  March 30, 2009

Greg [Gutfeld] and FOX “Red Eye” Crew…

…. I caught the tail end of the segment on tonight’s Red Eye where Prof. Marc Lamont Hill was lecturing us about “homophobia” – comparing gay sexual content with straight sexual content. So, does the ever-expanding definition of that tendentious term now cover all those who don’t want to see two men kissing on TV, or those who recoil at two guys engaged in “gay” foreplay on the big screen? Then guess what: we’re all “homophobes” now except for a small percentage of homosexuals and straight “progressives.” (Note that use of the latter term is curiously conditional on labeling as “progress” the embrace of aberrant sex linked disproportionately to STDs, including HIV; the CDC reports that a full 71 percent of male HIV cases in 2005 were linked to MSM, or “men having sex with men”: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/resources/factsheets/msm.htm.)

How condescending and pompous of Dr. Hill to peer into each of our hearts and minds and diagnose us with irrational fear (“phobia”). I didn’t see the rest of the segment — could you please post it online? — but please, please, don’t tell me that FOX is now joining the legions of pseudo-moralists who judge anyone who doesn’t celebrate homosexuality or cheerlead for “same-sex marriage” as somehow fearful, bigoted and hateful.

Enough already. Gay sex is wrong, unhealthy (especially between men), and my hunch is it’s still pretty off-putting to most FOX viewers who are honest with themselves. And that’s OK. But I’ll go further: if there is a growing acceptance of homo-sexual behavior, especially among young people, that’s not a good thing but a sign of America’s descent into decadence, and our departure from a transcendent Judeo-Christian moral code that has served this nation well.

Please note that I’m cc’ing Dr. Hill on this message, but if you reach him before I do, please tell him to go ahead and report me to the anti-Christian “defamers” over at GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) for my heartlessly homophobic and horribly heterosexist defense of … normalcy and natural sex. Thanks–pl

(I run a Chicago-based group that opposes the homosexual, bisexual and transsexual activist movements.)

Peter LaBarbera

President
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
www.aftah.org

_________________________________________

By Laurie Higgins
First published Feb. 25, 2009 by Illinois Family Institute

Wayne Besen said this visual target graphic representing homosexual activists targeting traditional marriage — in a video produced by the Family Policy Council of West Virginia — turned the video into a “violent ad.” At bottom is an excerpt of the narration of the video surrounding the portion with the “target” graphic.

Wayne Besen, former spokesman for the subversive homosexual activist Human Rights Campaign and founder of the hate organization Truth Wins Out, apparently can’t make a distinction between a domestic terrorist threat and — a metaphor.

Besen has a West Virginia marriage initiative in his sights. He sees in this utterly benign video by The Family Policy Council of West Virginia a nefarious sniper threat. Please watch the video that has so terrorized Besen and that is more like an episode of The Waltons than 24:  http://www.wvformarriage.com/ [Click on YouTube above to watch video.]

His claim is both idiotic and comical. In one frame of this video, we see the nuclear family through the sight of a gun, which is a commonplace metaphor that means that someone or something is taking aim at or opposing something.  Is Besen actually claiming that society should prohibit the use of this metaphor? Will society tolerate this kind of intrusive censorship? And is Besen claiming that he and his collaborators don’t have traditional marriage and the natural family in their crosshairs?

I can’t think of a more serious domestic threat to fundamental First Amendment rights than that which is posed by homosexualists who seek to circumscribe both speech and religious rights if the exercise of those rights impedes their unholy march toward compulsory approval of homosexual behavior.

As I’ve mentioned before and will likely mention again, Georgetown University lesbian law professor, Chai Feldblum, has stated that when same-sex marriage is legalized, conservative people of faith will lose religious rights.

Public school libraries engage in virtual absolute censorship of all books that espouse conservative perspectives on homosexuality, all the while accumulating a horde of pro-homosexual books that would make Midas envious.

Public schools expose students to resource after resource in context after context that affirm the view that homosexuality is morally equivalent to heterosexuality while never offering resources that challenge that view.

Anti-discrimination policies that include the term “sexual orientation” are being used to prohibit people of faith from acting according to their consciences. Because we, in our ignorance, apathy, and cowardice, permitted this term to be included in anti-discrimination policy, schools can’t fire administrators and teachers who have elective amputations of healthy body parts and cross-dress.

And now, homosexual activists have metaphors in their sights.

____________________________________

Here is an excerpt of the narration from the pro-traditional-marriage video by the Family Policy Council of West Virginia, in the portion surrounding the “target” graphic:

“Marriage between a man and a woman is held up as the ideal in all of civilized society because its profound stabilizing effects on our culture, as well as the important economic benefits of strong and intact families. ["Target" graphic begins here] But today that ideal is under an unrelenting attack as same-sex marriage in West Virginia is a closer reality than you may think [target graphic ends]. Thirty states have already passed constitutional amendments defining marriage but activists outside our state are aggressively targeting the remaining 20, including West Virginia — working tirelessly to redefine marriage away from God’s design to favor the desires of adults over the needs of children for the naturally balanced model of a mother and a father. The push for SSM has produced an historical crisis for the church. Today in courtrooms across the country in decisions as recent as last month, our constitutional guarantee of religious liberty is going toe to toe with an aggressive social agenda, and the Church is losing….”

Send To Phone

Who could not have been moved by FOX News commentator Juan Williams (left) tearing up as he described how he never thought he would see this day when a fellow African American would rise to the highest office in the land? President Obama is a testimony to America as a land of freedom and opportunity, but he is wrong to oppose pro-life laws restricting abortion and to equate his radical pro-homosexual agenda — already posted on the White House website — with genuine “civil rights.” 

By Peter LaBarbera

Today we get back to dealing with policy but yesterday we celebrated America. Our differences with President Barack Obama are significant [read AFTAH Board Member Matt Barber's statement on Obama's newly published, radical "LGBT" agenda HERE]– and many of the claims being made about him are ridiculous, such as when one TV commentator said yesterday that Obama “transcends the culture wars” — but in this moment we cherish what is good and great about the United States.

It is astonishing to behold — in a nation that once allowed the shipment of slaves from Africa, bound in shackles and shipped across the Atlantic like cargo, then sold in auctions like cattle — the induction of the first man of African ancestry as President of the United States. Who can doubt that this is truly a land of freedom and opportunity, where anyone who works hard can succeed and where goodness (in this case, the triumph over centuries of racism) can prevail through struggle and democratic reform?

We don’t walk in their shoes, so it is impossible for white people to understand the joy of Blacks in seeing history made yesterday. Who could not be moved by FOX News commentator Juan Williams tearing up as he described how he never thought he would see this day when a fellow African American would rise to the highest office in the land? It was a patriotic moment.

On Election Day 2008, I served as a Republican poll-watcher in Aurora, Illinois, and I will never forget the beaming faces of African Americans, especially older people voting for the first time. One woman who appeared to be in her late thirties or early forties excitedly inquired as to how to cast her ballot; she was a first-time voter and could barely contain her happiness and pride. Later, a black man stepped in front of the election judges and proclaimed: “I’m here to vote for BARACK OBAMA!” For a moment ideology went out the window and my heart was warmed by these citizens of color seeing their American dream fulfilled in a way they never thought possible.

Most of us have seen racism in action and many have also experienced it. Yes, racism is a two-way street, but whites who are occasionally treated rudely or otherwise mistreated by Blacks cannot compare that to the history of institutional oppression that Blacks have had to overcome in America. (That’s no excuse of black racism.) In college, one of my roommates, who is white, fell in love with a beautiful African-American girl. On his wedding day, his best man boycotted the ceremony because of her skin color. Today, my college buddy and his wife have a wonderful family — and they would reject the notion that somehow their interracial marriage should in any way be compared to or used to rationalize homosexual “marriage.”

Are we like past racists?

This brings me to the argument — or we should say a slander — put forth by the Social Left that opponents of homosexual agenda (i.e., the “Religious Right”) are the “racists” of today — as if pro-family advocates would be defending Jim Crow in an another era. (Occasionally in moments of weakness and doubt, some on our side buy into this nonsense.) One liberal publisher of a magazine that purports to promote corporate “diversity” even equated this writer with a 19th Century preacher who used the Bible to justify slavery. This is a calumny against people of faith, including African Americans, who favor the natural, created moral order — based upon the complementarity of the sexes.

We’ve said it many times and will keep on saying it: homosexual behavior — changeable, sinful and unhealthy — has nothing whatsoever to do with race. Racial/ethnic diversity is good; sexual “diversity” is wrong when it attempts to legitimize unnatural sex and sex outside of marriage. If the race-homosexuality (or racist-”homophobe”) analogy were correct, how does one explain my great satisfaction in that portion of Obama’s ascendancy that thrusts a spear into the heart of racism? And I am not alone; in my 20-plus years as a conservative activist, I have only rarely met a fellow conservative or Christian (or religious person) for whom race — rather than ideology or policy — is a deciding factor in assessing politicians. In fact, if anything, most pro-family friends I know are eager to support Black conservatives.

As a kid growing up in mostly white middle-class suburbs of Chicago and then Detroit, I came to hate racism — due partly to being educated on slavery, Jim Crow, and the civil rights movement but also due to a type of “liberal white guilt.” By that I mean the part of me that cheers racial progress and roots for the underdog. I became, like many educated whites, a bit of a bleeding heart on race. One of our family’s favorite movies is “Remember the Titans,” starring Denzel Washington, which uses football to teach about racial harmony. It’s embellished history, but I love it. There is a terrific scene where the two defensive stars in a forcibly integrated Virginia school — one black, one white — finally put their racist attitudes aside and gel as a defensive unit. Ultimately, they become close, lifelong friends. In another scene, Washington, playing the black coach, lectures his white assistant coach for coddling the black players but not the white ones. Thus, even this movie makes the point that true equality will come only when Blacks do not receive special treatment but are treated like everybody else.

We’re probably not even close to living in an America where race doesn’t matter. Surely race affected the liberal media’s coddling of Obama, but much of their love affair with the Obama derives from his liberal agenda. (His “coolness” helped, too.) The question in my mind is: when will the media and liberals get over their own biases and bigotry and give black Christian conservatives a fair shake? Can you imagine a Republican black conservative candidate for president getting the kid glove treatment from media that Obama received? Remember how the media savaged Clarence Thomas?

Homosexuals grab the “civil rights” mantle

The American maturation on race — e.g., the growing acceptance of interracial couples — is a good thing. So it’s no surprise that homosexual activists would seek to grab the “civil rights” mantle for themselves. But there is a key difference between their cause and the genuine civil rights movement: the latter strove against a sin: racism; the former promotes sin — i.e., the acceptance of homo-sexual behavior (which God calls “detestable”) — and radically redefining marriage and family.

But what about “gays”? Don’t they experience discrimination? The problem arises when homosexual activists falsely claim that — like skin color — their sexual desires are unchangeable and the basis for government-backed rights. The whole concept of “sexual orientation,” which seeks to take responsibility away from people for their sinful choice to embrace homosexual practice, violates Scripture, natural law, and thousands of years of Judeo-Christian history. And now we are facing a battle between “gay rights” and the rest of Americans’ freedom of religion, which includes the right to act on one’s belief that homosexual behavior is wrong.

It’s so uncool to say so in the Age of Obama, but it’s still true: a healthy society “discriminates” against homosexuality and other destructive sins; a deteriorating culture promotes sin. Thankfully, thousands of men and women have successfully abandoned the homosexual lifestyle, giving true hope to men and women struggling with this sexual sin.

Egalitarian “gay” activists demand that their (relationships be treated exactly like normal marriages. Give us “marriage equality!” they cry. Problem is, there is no “equality” between the natural family and traditional marriage — and the homosexual variety, which is missing one of the sexes. Homosexual sex, especially between men, is much riskier than normal sex — so much so that our federal government bans blood donations from men who’ve engaged in gay sodomy — and even women who have had sex with a ‘man who has had sex with a man.’ To pretend that homosexuality is equivalent to civil rights in the law only encourages men and women to embrace this destructive and immoral lifestyles. To do so in our schools only leads impressionable children into immoral and risky behaviors.

Thus, it is entirely consistent from a moral, justice and faith perspective to both oppose racial injustice and support the primacy in law and culture of the natural, mother-father family and God-ordained marriage.

It is not consistent with Christianity, however, to equate racism with “homophobia,” as the Left in its arrogance and ignorance now does as a matter of faith (in much the same way that it marches in lockstep for unrestricted killing of unborn babies abortion-on-demand). That activst term “homophobe” has become a catch-all to demonize anyone who opposes the homosexual political and cultural agenda — including African Americans, who surveys and election results show have a greater moral opposition to homosexuality and “gay marriage” than whites.

So I am happy that Barack Obama shattered the presidential color barrier and I will be praying for him. But in the spirit of true racial equality I am going to fight his no-hope campaign to repeal pro-life laws restricting abortion and his administration’s attempt to enact the homosexual lobby’s bogus “civil rights” agenda — in exactly the same way I would if Obama were a white liberal.

Political Indoctrination Replaces Education in Wisconsin English Class

1/14/2009 7:22:00 AM
By Laurie Higgins, DSA Director -Illinois Family Institute

I’m speechless. I’m also beginning to understand how a homosexuality-affirming middle school was by default approved by the Milwaukee Board of Education. Wisconsin public schools are permitting radical ideologues to use public money to promote their subversive, unproven moral conclusions and political goals about homosexuality. These propagandists, who should be teaching history or literature or writing, are instead pursuing their illegitimate goals of transforming the views of other people’s children on the contentious issue of homosexuality.

Here is the most recent manifestation of educational malpractice:

Sarah Arnold who teaches 11th grade English in the Elkhorn, Wisconsin area, generously shares with readers of Teaching Tolerance, a publication of the social justice organization Southern Poverty Law Center, her grand sexual re-education scheme. Disturbed that her students “cracked jokes about anything that defied gender stereotypes,” she embarked on a 37-day indoctrination program to transform her students’ views on homosexuality — a 37-day unit. The average school year is 180 days, and she spent 37 of them on homosexuality.

Here are some of the activities from the unit she titled, “Exposing Hidden Homophobia”:

• Students “conducted an in-depth exploration of depictions of the GLBTQ community in the mass media”
• Students “watched the film Trevor (about the struggle of a gay teen in the Bible Belt in the 1970s)”
• Students “viewed a PBS special about the anti-gay murder of Billy Jack Gaither”
• Students “did Internet research on the nature of homophobia”
• Students “selected and read a book from a short list of young adult works about gay issues” (including Rainbow Boys, Rainbow High, Rainbow Road, Getting It, A Tale of Two Summers, The Laramie Project, So Hard to Say, Geography Club, Alone in the Trenches)

ARTICLE continues at: http://www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=34214

Come to think of it, isn’t the current homosexual legal effort to overturn Prop 8 — the California marriage amendment that passed Nov. 4– decidedly Democracy-Phobic? I wish those spoiled-brat Voter-Phobes would stop using liberal judges to cheat the citizens.

Essays like this lift my soul: I believe there is still a vast, silent majority of Americans who would agree with Rev. Perryman’s common-sense and clear-headed thinking. — Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.com

__________________________________

Am I Homo Phobic?

By Rev. Wayne Perryman
The dictionary defines homosexuality as: “Having a desire for someone of the same sex [gender] or the act of having sex with someone of the same sex [gender].  In other words it is a sexual behavior carried out with someone of the same gender.  It did not define it as two people of the same gender who happens to love one another.  Simply put, both homosexuality and heterosexuality are about sex.  One sexual expression is perfectly in line with how nature has designed our bodies for reproductive purposes (it called heterosexuality) and the other is not (this one is called homosexuality). Neither sexual expression has anything to do with love.  Both are sexual behaviors expressed through physical contact between two or more people.

Sexual activity may be an expression of love, but sex itself is not love.  All mature adults know that sex and love are two different things. Pure love most often is not expressed in a sexual manner. Loving parents who love their children will give their life for their child, but they never have sex with that child.  Soldiers have been known to give their lives for a fellow soldier (of the same gender), the ultimate expression of love according to the Bible (St. John 15:13), but they never have sex with that individual. Brothers and sisters have sacrificed their lives for their siblings by donating their organs to save the life of the other, while others have left their entire estate to their siblings, but in both cases these expressions of love never included sex. The act of sex is merely a physical behavior that is most often expressed in the privacy of ones home and therefore should not be protected under Civil Rights Laws. Its proper place of protection should be covered by privacy laws, not Civil Rights Laws. Our laws should be designed to discourage criminal behavior, not endorse private sexual behavior.  When gays said they were born this way and compared themselves with African Americans, one black child wrote:

My sexual act did not make me black
This is something the gays cannot say.
For it is a fact that their sexual act,
Is why they call themselves gay.

Homosexuality and heterosexuality is a sexual behavior expressed, it is not a physical status like black or white skin.

Having said that, Am I Homo-Phobic if I do not like, accept or feel comfortable with the gays’ sexual expression (behavior)? Homo-Phobic meaning:  fearing or hating the gay person or the homosexual individual who engages in such behavior? Before answering this question, please let me share with you other behaviors that I am uncomfortable with.

• I do not like (or I am uncomfortable with) heterosexuals who affectionately make out in public when they can do it in the privacy of their homes – Am I Hetero-Phobic and hate heterosexuals?
• I do not like (or I am uncomfortable with) individuals who cheat on their spouse – This means I must have a Spousal Cheater-Phobic and hate or fear spouses that cheat.
• I do not like it (and I feel uncomfortable) when my sons sag their pants like gang members – Perhaps I hate or fear my sons .  Shall we call this Sons-Phobic?
• I do not like it (and I am uncomfortable) when drivers cut other drivers off on the freeway – Am I Driver-Phobic and hate or fear drivers?
• I do not like it when my African American brothers and sisters use the “N” word. This must mean I am Afro-Phobic and fear and hate my African American brothers and sisters?
• I do not like and I am uncomfortable with a lot of my own bad habits – Am I Self –Phobic and hate and fear myself?

I guess you get my point.  Just because I do not like certain behaviors or that I am uncomfortable with certain behaviors, does not mean that I fear or hate the person who engage in such behavior.

We must not allow others to label us or put a guilt trip on those of us who do not like, accept or feel comfortable with the gay lifestyle. I’m sure that even within the gay community there are certain behaviors that they do not like among their own group, but does that mean they fear or hate the person demonstrating such behavior? Do I hate or fear gays? Absolutely not! If I ever saw anyone attempting to physically harm a gay person, as a Christian, like the “Good Samaritan in the Bible, I would be one of the first to come to their rescue, not because they are gay, but because they, like myself are loved by God (St John 3:16).

Final thoughts:  As stated before, gays often compare their experience with the African American experience, but African Americans have never had the option of putting their black skin in the closet to escape or avoid persecution – and we were never hated because of our behavior, we were hated simply because we were black.

___________________________

About the Author

Rev. Wayne Perryman (e-mail: doublebro@aol.com; website: www.wayneperryman.com) is a former newspaper publisher, radio talk-show host, and corporate employment relations consultant, and the author of several books including his latest, Unfounded Loyalty, in which he reveals the startling history — unknown to many Blacks (and probably most Americans) — that the Democratic Party was the party of Jim Crow and the Ku Klux Klan. See a good review of Unfounded Loyalty HERE. In the book, Perryman writes, “On the issue of slavery, the Democrats literally gave their lives to expand it; the Republicans gave their lives to ban it. … In my research, which covers the period from 1832 to 2002, I found two familiar strains running through the cultural development of the American Black: the positive and powerful role of Christianity and the little known and debilitating role of the Democrats — from slavery through the Clinton Administration. There is also a critical analysis of our current black leadership.”

Rev. Perryman devotes much of his time serving his community. In addition to serving as Minister in Charge of Church Administration for Mt. Calvary Christian Center Church of God in Christ, in Mercer Island, Washington, Rev. Perryman heads up his own consulting firm. His company specializes in conducting fact-finding investigations on behalf of inner-city discrimination plaintiffs who are unsuccessful in obtaining representation through law firms and community agencies. For his ongoing work as a community activist, Rev. Perryman has received commendations from members of the United States Congress, former Washington State governor Booth Gardner, and former Seattle mayor Charles Royer. In addition to this recognition, Perryman’s work with children, professional athletes, gang members, and major corporations has resulted in local, national and international media coverage.

According to his website, in 1993, Rev. Perryman challenged major Christian publishers with his research book entitled, The 1993 Trial On The Curse of Ham. In his book, he proved that the publishers were wrong when they stated that, according to the Bible, the Black race was cursed. The curse theory was used to justify slavery, establish Jim Crow Laws, and promote racial discrimination. Perryman’s book forced two major Christian publishers and the Encyclopedia Britannica to remove this false theology from their publications – a theory that had existed for over three hundred years.

By blasting Obama for choosing Rick Warren as an Inaugural speaker — and demonizing Warren as a “homophobe” because he supported Prop 8 — homosexual activists are showing the world just how empty their “tolerance” ideology really is. Click on photo to enlarge.

Here’s an outstanding release from Pastor Bryan Fischer with the Idaho Values Alliance, an affiliate of American Family Association. Poor Barack Obama: he’s promised the world to one of the most demanding and unreasonable special interest movements on the planet. Imagine blasting the gregarious Warren as a “homophobe” because he supported Prop 8 in California. (Note the incredibly elastic, ever-expanding definition of homophobia.) Our favorite lesbian blog-stremist Pam Spaulding chastises Warren for his “sad bigotry” HERE and hits Warren for “bigotry, small-mindedness and downright ignorance” (Pam and friends know a thing or two about small-mindedness).

We agree with Bryan about the vaguely threatening nature of this quote by the hypocritical Joe Solmonese, head of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign:

Bizarrely, Solomonese says that Warren has “repeated the Religious Right’s big lie that supporters of equality for gay Americans are out to silence pastors.” He appears blind to the obvious fact that that’s exactly what he is trying to do here – put a muzzle on one of America’s leading pastors, proving that it’s hardly a lie at all.

Ominously, Solomonese told Politico, “There is a lot of energy and there’s a lot of anger and I think people are wanting to direct it somewhere.” If that sounds like a threat to you, I won’t disagree.

Also, note that Tolerant Joe embodies the evil nexus of the abortion and homosexuality movements: “Solmonese is the former Chief Executive Officer of EMILY’s List, where he oversaw one of the nation’s prominent pro-choice [read: pro-abortion] Democratic political action committees” (Wikipedia).

People are finally waking up to the truth: that the homosexual activist lobby is to tolerance and diversity what Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is to honest government. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Below is the Idaho Values Alliance release (write them at contact@idahovaluesalliance.com):

_________________________________________

Bryan Fischer, Executive Director, Idaho Values Alliance, 12-18-09

Voices of Tolerance, Diversity, Multiculturalism Come Unglued

Prediction: for the first time in American history, a speaker at a presidential inauguration may be booed unmercifully, and his remarks completely drowned out by angry jeers from an incensed crowd. We may even see shoes tossed at the inauguration platform by the hundreds. It could be a modern day lynching, only this time the victim of a vigilante mob will be proverbially strung up not because of skin color but creed.

Liberals in general and homosexual activists in particular claim to be all about tolerance, diversity, pluralism, multiculturalism and respect for differences.

Well, their commitment to those values has just been challenged by President-elect Barack Obama, and they have failed the test miserably.

Obama’s criminal offense is that, in a move that ought be celebrated by all who claim that America’s strength is found in its embrace of diversity, he picked an evangelical pastor who supports natural marriage and the sanctity of life to deliver the invocation at his inauguration.

Rick Warren of Saddleback Church has been tabbed for the task, despite the fact he openly supported Prop. 8, which elevated protection for one-man, one-woman marriage into the California constitution.

Said Warren during the campaign for Prop. 8, “For 5,000 years, every culture and every religion – not just Christianity -has defined marriage as a contract between men and women. There is no need to change the universal, historical definition of marriage to appease 2 percent of our population … This is not a political issue – it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about.”

Warren also said, in a recent interview with Beliefnet, that he is opposed to those who say that abortion should be “safe and rare.”

“Don’t tell me it should be rare. That’s like saying on the Holocaust, ‘Well, maybe we could save 20 percent of the Jewish people in Poland and Germany and get them out and we should be satisfied with that’ – I’m not satisfied with that. I want the Holocaust ended.”

A sample of what the press is calling “universally negative” outrage from the gay rights crowd:

Kathryn Kolbert of People for the American Way: Warren “doesn’t … deserve this position of honor.” She adds that someone who has “consistent mainstream American values” rather than someone so “radical” should have been picked instead.

Note to Ms. Kolbert: Prop. 8 got the same percentage of votes in California that Obama got nationwide. I guess that means natural marriage is at least as “mainstream” as Obama is, Kathryn.

Sarah Posner of the “Nation” magazine: “Now it (Democratic outreach to evangelicals) has gone too far.”

Joe Solomonese of the Human Rights Campaign to Obama: “[You] have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table.” The selection, he says, is a “genuine blow to LGBT Americans,” and added, “We feel a deep level of disrespect when one of the architects and promoters of an anti-gay agenda is given the prominence and the pulpit of your historic nomination.”

Bizarrely, Solomonese says that Warren has “repeated the Religious Right’s big lie that supporters of equality for gay Americans are out to silence pastors.” He appears blind to the obvious fact that that’s exactly what he is trying to do here – put a muzzle on one of America’s leading pastors, proving that it’s hardly a lie at all.

Ominously, Solomonese told Politico, “There is a lot of energy and there’s a lot of anger and I think people are wanting to direct it somewhere.” If that sounds like a threat to you, I won’t disagree.

Solomonese throws Warren’s support for the sanctity of human life into the mix as another unforgivable sin that should disqualify him from public prayer.

Gay rights activist Rick Jacobs: “It’s a huge mistake. (Warren’s) really the wrong person to lead the president into office. His presence on the inauguration stand is a slap in the faces of the millions of GLBT voters who so enthusiastically supported him. This tone-deafness to our concerns must not be tolerated. We have just endured eight years of endless assaults on our dignity and equality from a president beholden to bigoted conservative Christians. The election was supposed to have ended that era. It appears otherwise.”

Gawker.com: Warren is “yet one more in a long and historic line of American Huckster Ministers, but he’s still a right-wing crank in mainstream clothing.”

The Washington Blade, a homosexual newspaper: “Obama’s first big mistake.”

Obama’s spokesman (generic use) gamely defended the choice, saying, “This is going to be the most inclusive, open, accessible inauguration in American history.”

(But lest evangelicals take too much encouragement from Obama’s decision, his spokesman was quick to say that “The president-elect certainly disagrees with (Warren) on [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] issues.”)

There are several lessons here.

1. One, the tolerance crowd has tolerance only for people who agree with them. They are blindly and hypocritically intolerant to the point of tyranny toward advocates of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
2. Two, homosexual activists really are out to silence the voice of evangelical Christians. They want Warren muzzled and driven off the platform, and my guess is that they will boo him off if Obama doesn’t pull him off first. Unless cooler heads prevail, we may see the exercise of a heckler’s veto like we have never seen before. Imagine the sound of 4 million people booing in unison, and you’ve got a picture of what may happen at the inauguration ceremony…We have only seen the beginning of this saga. There is just no way left-wing activist groups are done putting pressure on Obama to repent in dust and ashes. They will be relentless until he recants, and make him pay if he doesn’t.
3. Three, this shows the utter emptiness of homosexual advocacy of pluralism and multiculturalism. If they really believed that stuff, they would be celebrating the most inclusive inaugural ceremony in American history. But they won’t because they don’t. Their circle of inclusiveness is far too narrow, tiny and small to have a place in it for conservative Christians.
4. Four, it doesn’t matter how gracious you are, if you take a stand for natural marriage you will be labeled a hatemonger and a bigot. Warren is about as gracious, compassionate, jovial and kind as you can get. Fat lot of good that has done for him with the tolerance crowd.

In the worldview of homosexual activists, “loving the sinner, hating the sin” is simply Sunday School bigotry.

This affair gives the lie to the accusation – even shared by many naïve Christians – that Christians are hated on this issue because we are condemning and hateful. Warren is neither, and look what they’re doing to him.

We as Christians certainly should continue to be gracious, open-hearted and courteous to all, including homosexual activists. I have always treated them with kindness and friendliness, and I have a fondness and affection for many of them I’ve met. But it is foolish to think this will cause them to like us in return. Disagreement is not hatred – but try telling that to them.

Liberals Outraged Over Inaugural Preacher

Obama backers slam his pick of Rick Warren

Newsmax.com – Liberals Outraged Over Rick Warren’s Obama Invocation

Obama’s Rev. Warren Inaugural Pick Sparks Gay Fury – FOXNews.com

Obama’s inaugural choice sparks outrage

Gay leaders furious with Obama – Ben Smith and Nia-Malika Henderson – Politico.com

LAist: Inauguration Team for Obama Stirs Prop 8 Fears After Choosing OC Pastor

IVA IN THE BLOGOSPHERE:

Free Speech Blazing: Proof The Planned Parenthood Is A Racist Organization

If you value the work of the IVA, please consider a donation today. Information on how to donate, including online, may be found HERE. Thank you!