Below is a redacted copy of President Barack Obama’s Campaign 2012 Tumblr page celebrating another tragic “first” for his Administration: the traditional Naval ”first kiss” following a ship’s return to port occurred Dec. 21 between two women – as opposed to the normal and natural male-female spousal kiss.  The AP photo below (covered up here by AFTAH for the sake of decency) appeared worldwide, and Obama reposted it along with a portion of the story as it appeared in the British newspaper The Guardian. As you can read in the (typically one-sided) AP story, David Bauer, commanding office of the USS Oak Hill, was in cahoots with this homosexuals-in-the-military promotional stunt, telling AP that the crew was fine with the lesbians’ selection. Said Bauer of the publicly perverse kiss: “It’s going to happen and the crew’s going to enjoy it.” (That’s an order!)

It must be remembered that despite Western modernists’ curious obsession with homosexuality, this lesbian kiss is indecent by historic moral and religious (Judeo-Christian) standards. We are tempted to say Shame on the President, but it is all too obvious by now that this Commander-in-Chief sees no shame in celebrating sexual deviance (sin) – even open displays like this. (Obama infamously pooh-poohed a New Testament passage in Romans that clearly proscribes lesbianism and male homosexual acts.) Liberals cannot rewrite the moral code nor can they redefine decency to accommodate anything-goes sexuality.

Now Obama and the Democrats have ensured that wherever public displays of affection between married spouses and boyfriends-and-girlfriends occur, indecent spectacles like this will be in close proximity. Military moms and dads: be prepared to block the eyes of your little ones at reunions and all formerly wholesome military functions. Should God Bless this America?– Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Obama Tumblr entry acclaims the first-ever lesbian "first kiss" in the Navy. Traditionally in American cullture, open displays of homosexual behavior, a perversion, have been considered indecent. Here we have placed a box over the AP photo, which was widely published.

Scott Lively addressing the AFTAH banquet in October. Lively received AFTAH's "Americans Truth Teller" award for 2011.

Part Five of the AFTAH interview [click HERE to listen] with Scott Lively of Defending the Family International.  This was pre-recorded and aired Dec. 3, 2011. Go to the AFTAH Radio Hour Archive for the rest of this very informative interview. In the course of AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera’s interview with Lively, the two discussed:

• The dire state of the American Christian Church vis-a-vis the aggressive movement to normalize homosexual behavior and gender confusion in the culture;
• The “terror” tactics and aggressive campaigns used by homosexual activists to intimidate good people into silence on this issue;
• Lively’s personal experience with the dirty tactics and lies used by radical LGBT activists against pro-family leaders attempting to stop the “gay” revolution (including one notorious fake “anti-gay hate crime” in Oregon). Lively more than almost any pro-family conservative alive today has experienced these tactics firsthand in more than 20 years of working on the front lines (here and abroad) against the homosexualist agenda;
• The futility of relying on politics and the courts to contain the advance of government-backed homosexuality — and how many “ministry-minded” or apathetic believers are woefully naive about the Culture War raging on this issue;
• The campaign of lies used by pro-homosexual militants (and repeated by the media) to smear Lively and others as allegedly supporting the murder of homosexuals in Uganda;
• The corruption of words by the pro-homosexual Left, including “gay,” “sexual orientation” and “marriage equality”;
• The appearance of PRO-homosexuality “evangelicals” like Grove City College’s Warren Throckmorton and Chicago’s Andrew Marin – who confuse Christians and undermine biblical truth on the issue by capitulating to pro-”gay” ideology and semantics;
• The connection of homosexuality and sexual deviance to the Nazi Party in Germany. (See Lively’s book, The Pink Swastika);
• The very real threat to religious liberty posed by the tremendous rise of homosexual (“gay”) power in the United States.

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes.  Real Player 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.

12-3-11, Scott Lively, Part Five

Pastor John Kirkwood

This is Part One of the AFTAH interview with John Kirkwood [click HERE to listen], pastor of Grace Believer Church in Bensonville, IL (near O’Hare Airport at the intersection of Route 83 and 290). This interview was pre-recorded and aired September 24, 2011. John and AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera discuss Christian political correctness surrounding homosexuality — and why so many Christians are ineffectual in the “Culture Wars.” Kirkwood and Grace Gospel Fellowship Church are hosting a fund-raising talk by Scott Lively (author of “The Pink Swastika”) Friday, Oct. 14th at 7:00 PM. The next day, at the annual AFTAH banquet feating Dr. Erwin Lutzer (held at the Christian Liberty Academy), Lively receives the 2011 AFTAH “Truth Teller” Award for his years of struggle as a leader opposing the homosexualist movement. To hear a talk LaBarbera gave Sunday at Grace Gospel, go HERE (click second of two videos under the video graphic). Write us at americansfortruth@gmail.com to RSVP for either event, or for more information. Go HERE for information on the Oct. 15 banquet (only $10/person to attend; $20 at the door).

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes.  Real Player 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.

9-24-11, John Kirkwood

ORDER A BOOK: “A Queer Thing” is available through AFTAH at a discount for a gift of $25 or more (postage paid). Give online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/, or send your donation to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. This is a four-part interview; go click HERE for the link to Part One of the interview.

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 listening with it.  Left click once on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment or two to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show. 

4-30-11, Dr. Michael Brown

From today’s AFTAH e-newsletter; go HERE for contact info for Chili’s and parent company Brinker International — which is a “National Corporate Partner” of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force:

Dear Readers,

This is not just another e-mail about boycotting yet another irresponsible corporation.  It’s about educating the nation on the incredibly extreme and unhealthy agenda of the pro-Homosexuality-Bisexuality-Transsexuality Lobby — and holding company executives accountable for financing that agenda.  Last week in Minneapolis, I and a few other pro-family advocates went undercover at the annual “Creating Change” grassroots homosexual conference put on by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.  There were more than 2,000 LGBT activists in attendance!  Some of the “change” we heard advocated in the various workshops, and which we will document in the days and weeks ahead, was shocking.  Yet this agenda is one that the left-leaning media refuse to examine, much less expose. So AFTAH will do the media’s job for them by laying out the Gay Task Force’s extremist vision, which includes:

• Taxpayer-financed “sex change” operations for transsexuals (not to do so is “discrimination” against “transgenders”);
• Using polling, focus groups and emotional arguments to persuade evangelical Christians to ignore Scripture and accept homosexuality-based “rights”;
• Using the tragedy of homosexual youth suicides to shame Christians into stop calling homosexuality sinful;
• Celebrating sadomasochism (consensual sexual violence and degradation) and “kinky”/fetish sexual behaviors
• Pro-homosexuality lessons for grade school kids (because waiting until middle school is too late to reach them); 
• “Non-judgmental condom advocacy for young men in the name of HIV prevention — and even being non-judgmental in “safe sex” training when it comes to bizarre/disgusting “fetish” behaviors
• Predicting not just a future “gay” president of the United States but also a “bi” and a “transgender” president! (I’ll withhold the jokes…);
• “[F--k--g] with gender,” and celebrating bisexuality and “genderqueer” lifestyles (see this definition for latter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer);
• Using “gender identity” laws to pressure businesses to bend to the transgender agenda of “Gender-Neutral Restrooms” — to replace the old-fashioned variety with an “M” or an “F” on the door.

There is much, much more — the homosexual Task Force puts the “D” back in “Deviance,” that’s for sure.  Stay tuned as we lay out the “change” that this high-powered organization and “Friend of Barack Obama” is promoting for America — with help from Chilis restaurants, Wells Fargo, Southwest Airlines, and other major corporations.  God bless you and thanks for standing with us! – Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth, www.aftah.org; americansfortruth@gmail.com. 

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

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

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

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

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

Now we anticipate a coming attempt to discredit Schumm from “authentically Christian” Grove City College’s Special Professor for the Advancement of Ugandan Homosexual Rights Warren Throckmorton (see our posts HERE and HERE, and Lifesite’s post HERE). The latter is vying with Jim Wallis and Andy Marin (Marin Foundation) for the dubious distinction of being the Homosexuality Lobby’s leading evangelical Useful Idiot. (Here’s a good post, albeit by a socialist, on Useful Idiots, a phenomenon that “implies cynicism, contempt and manipulation, and has Stalinist roots,” according to the author. Also see the late New York Times columnist and wordsmith William Safire’s take on it HERE.) – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

__________________________________________

LifeSiteNews reports [to sign up for LifeSite's daily updates, go HERE]:                                                           

Children Raised by Homosexual Parents More Likely to Identify as Gay: Study

By Kathleen Gilbert, LifeSite, first published Oct. 25, 2010

MANHATTAN, Kansas, October 25, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A study due out next month has found that children raised by homosexual parents are far more likely to identify as homosexual themselves.

Walter Schumm, a family studies professor at Kansas State University, told AOL News that he questioned the conviction – ironclad in both popular culture and the academic world – that parents could not influence their children’s sexual orientation, while being able to influence so many other aspects of their lives.

“I just want to know the truth about something,” he said.

In the abstract of the study, Schumm concluded that research conducted by pro-family leader Paul Cameron in 2006, although widely lambasted by media and professionals, accurately concluded that homosexuals are more likely to raise homosexual children.

The study, an analysis of previous research, attempted to skew the results in favor of popular opinion, but still found Cameron’s conclusion solid.

“Despite numerous attempts to bias the results in favour of the null hypothesis and allowing for up to 20 (of 63, 32%) coding errors, Cameron’s (2006) hypothesis that gay and lesbian parents would be more likely to have gay, lesbian, bisexual or unsure (of sexual orientation) sons and daughters was confirmed,” it states.

According to the abstract, between 16 and 57 percent of children with gay or lesbian parents were found to adopt homosexual identities. Daughters of lesbian couples were found to be particularly affected, with 33 to 57 percent identifying as lesbian.

Schumm’s paper will be published in the November edition of the Journal of Biosocial Science.

News of the study has picked up little traction in the media except for left-leaning blogs and minor outlets who have accused AOL of “showcas[ing] anti-gay bad science.”

Ann Coullter comes to Chicagoland Thursday, Oct. 7th. Coulter outraged "queer" liberals like Perez Hilton when she told 'conservative' homosexuals at GOProud's "Homocon" event that same-sex "marriage" "is not a civil right -- you're not black!"

WARNING: GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS

[CORRECTION: we received a note from homosexual blogger Joe Jervis (Joe.My.God.) pointing us to a Human Events article by Lisa De Pasquale that clarifies some careless reporting by Politico of Ann Coulter's GOProud speech: it was not a GOProud member (as I reported, relying on Politico) but rather a joking Greg Gutfeld of the latenight FOX show "Red Eye" who "heckled" Coulter, blurting out, "What's wrong with fisting?" after she -- using her patented comic hyperbole -- accused liberals of wanting to teach kindergartners about "fisting." Coulter and Gutfeld are friends. (Her point of reference was surely the infamous 2000 Boston "Fistgate" incident, in which middle- high school kids actually WERE instructed verbally about "fisting" -- at a Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Netword (GLSEN)-sponsored conference. ("Fisting" is a dangerous homosexual sadomasochistic perversion in which a man inserts his arm up another man's rectum.) 

[We have removed the portion of this article in which we speculated that it was a GOPround member or supporter who asked, "What's wrong with fisting?" Also, it also should be noted that, despite the value of correcting the record on Coulter's speech, De Pasquale works for American Conservative Union, which supports GOProud and defended the homosexual group's sponsorship of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) -- against complaints by conservative Christian groups who accused CPAC of promoting the acceptance of homosexuality. AFTAH opposed GOProud's sponsorship of CPAC.  -- Peter LaBarbera, www.AmericansForTruth.org]

_______________________________________

By Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Dear AFTAH Readers,

If you are near Chicago, I’d like you to consider attending an Ann Coulter speaking event a week from today — put on by my good friend Sandy Rios, president of Culture Campaign, a pro-family action group based in Illinois. Sandy, a FOX News contributor, is a brave truth-teller who surely would have gone farther in the media had she not stayed true to her Christian principles; please support her by coming out this Thursday night!

I know that’s sort of an odd request given the swirl of controversy and debate surrounding Coulter’s recent speech at ‘HomoCon,’ an event put on by the homosexual Republican group ‘GOProud.‘ But trust me, you will be blessed by this event — and you’ll be helping out a solid organization, Culture Campaign, that has stood strongly against the homosexualist agenda.

First, here are the details:

WHEN: Thursday, Oct. 7, 7:30 PM — less than a week away

WHERE: The Meadows Club, 2950 W. Golf Rd., Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 (suburb north of Chicago). Online map here: http://www.themeadowsclub.com/location.htm

WHO: Ann Coulter, feisty conservative pundit and author of “Godless: The Church of Liberalism,” “Guilty: Liberal ‘Victims’ and their Assault on America,” and other books.

COST: $50; $35 for students; tickes will NOT BE SOLD AT THE DOOR

HOW TO ORDER TICKETS: Go online to Culture Campaign’s online order form: http://www.eventbrite.com/event/747925064. Tickets can be ordered up to 3 hours before the event’s start time (7:30 PM, Oct. 7th).

SPECIAL VIP DINNER OPPORTUNITY: Before the main event you can be a part of an exclusive VIP Reception & Dinner that includes a photo with Ann along with a personally signed book. For more information on this limited seating function contact Michael Glenn, Executive Director of Culture Campaign, at mglenn@culturecampaign.com.  

_______________________________________

If you come, I will see you there. Here’s why I’m going – even after my disappointment with Ann Coulter for lending legitimacy to a Republican upstart “gay” group (GOProud) that talks a good game about being conservative but really isn’t. As GOProud Chairman Chris Barron said in an August 4 Twitter post: “We are a gay organization, we only work on gay issues, we have never claimed otherwise. My God people.”

(The core purpose of GOProud is to promote the acceptance of homosexuality and same-sex relationships. Promoting ”pride” in a sin, supporting a judge who imposes ”gay marriage” against the expressed will of millions of California voters, and backing governmental/taxpayer recognition of aberrant sexual relationships is not conservative — period. However, GOProud does take conservative positions on issues like gun control and lower taxes – and it has even endorsed the Republican opponent of homosexual Barney Frank (D-MA), for which they were pilloried by liberal activist homosexuals.)

All that said, I agree pretty much with Bryan Fischer of AFA below (writing for Renew America) that Coulter redeemed her much-discussed GOProud booking to defend truth, including the idea that “same-sex marriage” has nothing to do with civil rights. Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily went further in his recent debate with GOProud founder Christopher Barron in Miami — exposing GOProud’s hypocrisy in claiming to be for “limited government” while failing to condemn a federal judge (reported homosexual Vaughn Walker) for invalidating the people’s vote in California in favor of traditional marriage. After Walker’s ruling, GOProud’s Jimmy LaSalvia made these comments — perfectly reflecting GOProud’s desire to have it both ways on ”conservatism” and “gay marriage.” The FrumForum blog quotes LaSalvia:

“As long as the government is in the marriage business it should treat gay couples as equal to their straight counterparts.  Accordingly, we are pleased with the outcome of the Prop 8 case.”

That said, LaSalvia qualified his satisfaction by noting that, “As conservatives, however, we continue to have reservations about using the courts to achieve these ends.”

GOProud’s Barron debates WND’s Farah

Christopher Barron of GOProud (left) debates WND's Joseph Farah. Photo: WND.com

It took some guts for Barron to come to the WND “Take America Back” conference and debate Joseph Farah (see photo) — although it also fits Barron’s masterful PR strategy of using controversy to stay in the news. I attended the event, and it was fascinating as much for what was not debated as for what was. (For example, when questioned from the floor, Barron acknowledged that rights come from God but he was never asked whether and on what basis he defends homosexual practice itself as moral and “conservative.”) 

Suffice it to say that Barron played a good game of dodging and weaving regarding his promotion of homosexual activist goals – even stating that GOProud did not “celebrate” the recent court ruling invalidating Prop 8 in California when clearly – like all other homosexualist groups — GOProud cheered the radical decision. I would welcome a debate with Barron that is less restrictive and more free-wheeling than the WND event, with more opportunity for follow-up questions.

Some gays don’t want ”gay rights” laws

Despite his and GOProud’s previous cheap shot at me after I challenged Coulter on the GOProud speech, I could sit down over a cup of coffee and discuss issues with Barron and we’d probably agree on as much as we disagree on. (When I met Barron at the debate and challenged him on his attack on me, he responded that I specialize in cheap shots.) The fact is, there are many homosexuals who disagree with the demands of the largely liberal-Democratic Homosexual Lobby – and who also disagree with its anti-religious stridency. Many don’t want “special rights,” as conservatives once widely called “sexual orientation” laws. And while GOProud equivocates and tries to ride the fence by claiming neutrality on dangerous big-government-gay bills like ENDA (Employment Nondiscrimination Act), some homosexuals completely reject the “gay rights” political agenda and just want to be left alone. (Barron says he does support Americans’ First Amendment and religious right to disagree with homosexual practice, but by advocating for federal Domestic Partner legislation, he would essentially force all citizens to subsidize it with their tax dollars.)

Like Farah, I will grant Barron this: you can hold conservative positions on a number of issues like guns and taxes yet have a homosexuality problem (or a theological one: Barron considers himself a Catholic yet says he is “married” to another man). But if you form an organization dedicated philosophically to advancing homosexuality – thereby undermining the historic, biblically-based moral/religious basis for American freedoms and prosperity – that ain’t “conservative” because you are working to reconfigure — not “conserve” — marriage and family as God designed them.

As Farah said at the debate: “Chris, your argument is not with me. It is with God. It’s with 6,000 years of Judeo-Christian history and the founding principles of this country.”

The same could be said of anyone — straight or “gay,” conservative or liberal, socialist or libertarian, religious or secular — who advocates for “same-sex marriage” and/or state and corporate recognition of homosexual relationships as a social good – or of homosexuality as the basis for civil rights.

Coulter’s GOProud Gold

I didn’t see a full text of Ann Coulter’s GOProud speech, but good for her for nailing the fraudulent case for oxymoronic “gay marriage” and homosexuality as a “civil right” with a couple of catchy one-liners. From Politico’s Ben Smith, who attended the event:

Coulter’s jokes Saturday riffed on the theme that GOProud doesn’t make same-sex marriage central to its appeal; it considers, Barron says, national security and the economy more important.

Marriage “is not a civil right – you’re not black,” Coulter said to nervous laughter. She went on to note that gays are among the wealthiest demographic groups in the country.

“Blacks must be looking at the gays saying, ‘Why can’t we be oppressed like that?’”

Hello, Republicans… Want to get more black votes? Then don’t abandon the fight against homosexual “marriage”!

GOProud member to Coulter: ‘What’s wrong with fisting?’

I read this liberal homosexual account of Coulter’s GOProud appearance on the website of homosexual Hollywood gossip writer Perez Hilton, who titled his piece, “Ann Coulter Sinks to New Lows of Vileness!” (emphasis added):

According to Talking Points Memo’s Megan Carpentier:

In fact, despite opening her speech with a joke about the difficulty of “coming out” as a fiscal conservative to one’s parents — something she congratulated the attendees on — Coulter’s speech to GOProud mystifyingly focused on social issues and not the fiscal and foreign policy issues that brought most of the attendees there. For instance, she told GOProud that the conservative gay rights movement ought to make common cause with the anti-abortion movement because, she said, “as soon as they find the gay gene, you know who’s getting aborted.” Coulter also made a forceful case against sex education in schools, accusing liberals of attempting to teach kindergartners about “fisting” (which garnered her a heckler, who shouted out “What’s wrong with fisting?”) [Editor's Note: see clarification at top: the heckler was Coulter's friend and FOX "Red Eye" host Greg Gutfeld--making a joke] and told the crowd that most parents didn’t want their children learning about the “homosexual lifestyle” instead of reading and writing.

As for Coulter being accused of “vileness” by the intolerant, vulgar and über-obnoxious Hilton (the guy who trashed Carrie Prejean with his gay-potty mouth running wild), that definitely commends Coulter. (Hilton, ever the sophisticated critic, completed his attack on Coulter with one of his patented mark-ups of her web photo with horns and something white scribbled on her mouth (don’t ask).

Homosexual activist blogger Jeremy Hooper (“Good As You”) cited this remark by Coulter as evidence that she’s a B-A-A-A-D person:

Coulter: the gays “ought to start being antiabortion because “once they find the gay gene, guess who’s getting aborted”

Hooper is probably too young to know that Coulter was merely parroting the line of a homosexual group called PLAGAL (Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians), which — at the height of the media’s hype of over the supposed genetic basis for homosexuality – made news by arguing that homosexuals should be pro-life because most parents would abort their unborn child if he or she was discoverd in utero to possess the postulated ”gay gene.”

Gay Porn Kings for the GOP!

Somehow I doubt that homosexual porn magnates make up an important voting bloc for the GOP, but with GOProud’s help, the Republicans could make a dent in that slimy constituency. Check out this from Politico’s coverage of Coulter’s speech (emphasis added):

Coulter’s talk drew a mixed response, but her presence marked the increasingly mainstream Republican embrace of gay rights. Coulter had a falling out with a conservative website that has published her, WorldNetDaily, over her attendance. “She’s doing something important – she’s showing her base that it’s OK,” said one attendee, Michael Lucas. (Lucas also confided to a reporter, “I wonder what Ann will think about the fact that I am the biggest producer of gay porn on the East Coast and probably in the whole U.S.”)

Perhaps Lucas could form another gay offshoot: GOPorn, for Republicans, gay and straight, who proudly produce and use pornography — but who also favor low taxes and smaller government. Traditional morality-hating Libertarians would surely jump on board in solidarity.

In his extremism, Lucas illustrates our basic point: you can support the Republican Party for (most of) its conservative platform – even if, in other areas of your life, you are the farthest thing from “conservative” imaginable. But don’t pretend that forming an organization that will help to mainstream your particular immoral behavior is “conservative.”

I’ll see you at the Coulter event Thursday. She won’t get any questions from pornographers, to be sure. But this will be our opportunity to solicit her views in a friendly setting on the Republican Party, conservatives, and homosexual-agenda politics. We have so few friends in the pundit world … let’s see where Ann really stands on this issue.

____________________________________

Below is a Renew America column by Bryan Fischer of American Family Association expressing satisfaction with Coulter’s GOProud speech:

September 27, 2010

Ann Coulter gets her “Warrior Princess” badge back

By Bryan Fischer

I criticized Ann Coulter last month when news surfaced that she had accepted an invitation to speak at HomoCon 2010, a gathering of so-called conservative homosexuals. (They can’t call themselves conservatives, for the simple reason that using the anal cavity for sex is not a conservative value.)

You also will notice that they have no hesitation calling themselves “homos,” as in “HomoCon,” but take umbrage if anybody else uses their own chosen moniker.

I did say that Ann might surprise us all and take the homosexuals straight on, but guessed that a desire not to upset her hosts, who surely paid a princessly sum to entice her into speaking and appearing on all their promotional posters, would likely prevent her from getting up in their business.

Well, I was wrong.

Ann took them straight on and gave them some straight talk I doubt they were ready for. There is no amount of sugar that will help this medicine go down.

According to the leftwing website Politico.com, she complimented the Christian audiences before whom she speaks by telling these homosexuals that the people who get her “gay jokes are gays.” Christians get them, she hinted, but “out of sweetness they don’t laugh at the gay jokes.” Alas, she was suggesting, if only Christians were as mean-spirited as everyone says they are! I have to leave my gay jokes in the green room because those Christians are just too darned civil and courteous and kind!

Then she let the air out of the tires on the tired argument that homosexual marriage is the civil rights issue of our day. Reminding them that blackness is an innate characteristic but sexual behavior is a choice, same-sex marriage, she said pointedly, “is not a civil right — you’re not black.”

As Gen. Colin Powell himself said, the comparison between homosexual behavior and race is “convenient but invalid.” People are born black, but they are not born gay. And many people who enter the homosexual lifestyle later leave it. So there are plenty of ex-gays, but you will never meet an ex-black.

Then she punctured a hole in the entire oppressed-minority argument by pointing out that homosexuals are among the wealthiest demographic groups in the nation, again making the civil rights argument utterly invalid.

Survey after survey has revealed that homosexuals tend to be more highly educated than their straight counterparts and have higher levels of income.

“Blacks must be looking at the gays, saying, ‘Why can’t we be oppressed like that?’” said Coulter.

So Christians are too tolerant to make fun of gays, homosexuals have no civil right to marry, and homosexuals can’t claim oppressed minority status. This from the keynote speaker at HomoCon, who got at least five figures to get right in the grill of her hosts.

Anybody at HomoCon want their money back?

And Ann, all is forgiven. Humble pie has never tasted so sweet. You are no longer the “Joan of Arc of homosexuality,” as I described you last month, you are now Daniella of the Lion’s Den. Good on ya, lass.

September 22, 2010
 
“CATHOLIC GAY” GROUP REBUKED
 
His Excellency, Timothy Broglio, the Archbishop for the Military Services, released a statement to the Catholic News Agency responding to a letter from Catholics for Equality; the gay advocacy group pleaded with him to support the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
 
Catholic League president Bill Donohue spoke to this issue today:

On June 1, Archbishop Broglio released an excellent statement recounting the Catholic Church’s opposition to homosexuality. He called on Catholic chaplains in the armed forces to show respect for the dignity of homosexuals, but he also implored them to “never condone—even silently—homosexual behavior.”
 
On September 17, a new dissident group, Catholics for Equality, wrote a letter to the archbishop that was not only critical of his Catholic position, it reeked with smugness and arrogance: “We are ready to help you and Catholic chaplains in the transition to full acceptance of gays and lesbians in the military and respectfully request a meeting with you….” So thoughtful of these malcontents to offer their help in transitioning the bishop to oppose the Catholic Church’s teachings on sexuality.
 
Archbishop Broglio’s response pulled no punches. He wondered how Catholics for Equality got the authority to identify itself as a Catholic entity, maintaining “it cannot be legitimately recognized as Catholic.”
 
He’s right. While any group can slap the label Catholic on itself, bona fide Catholics are under no obligation to acknowledge it. And by bona fide, I simply mean Catholics not in open rebellion against the teachings of the Magisterium.
 
Archbishop Broglio deserves the respect and support of all lay Catholics. His courage and erudition make

Prof. Rob Gagnon at AFTAH Truth Academy in August. Gagnon questions whether those supporting "rights" based on homosexuality would do the same for incest and polyamory.

Part Two of Peter LaBarbera’s interview with Prof. Rob Gagnon of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary (part Three is next week). This interview aired Sept. 11, 2010. In this discussion, Gagnon (www.robgagnon.net) goes deeper into his biblical analogy between homosexuality and ”adult committed incest” and polyamory (multiple-partner sexual unions). He also further critiques liberal evangelical Andrew Marin’s ministry approach in Chicago, noting that repentance — i.e., turning away from homosexual practice – is ”part of the conversion process.”

Pegging off Marin’s line about once being a ” Bible-banging homophobe,” Gagnon questions whether Marin would ever say, “I was once a Bible-banging incest-phobe.” He said the fact that liberals object to this sexual sin analogy does not make it invalid — and said it is more relevant than comparing the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice to biblical writings about slavery, women’s roles and dietary laws. 

Gagnon addresses the homosexualist challenge that the biblical concept of homosexuality was different than today’s homosexuality, noting that monogamous homosexual relationships did exist in Bible times. He also discusses lesbianism and critiques the NIV (New International Version) translations of homosexual terms in 1 Corinthians 6.  

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

9-11-10, Robert Gagnon, All

Former British P.M. Tony Blair used state power to promote the acceptance of homosexuality in the U.K. He is now working to make Christianity "gay"-affirming.

By Peter LaBarbera

I was sent this must-watch CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network) video by my friend Gary Glenn, head of the American Family Association of Michigan. Glenn is backing a civil rights lawsuit by the Thomas More Law Center against Attorney Gen. Eric Holder over the new homosexuality/transsexuality–inclusive “hate crimes” law. This video deserves wide circulation as a warning to America.

The Homosexual Activist Movement, aided and abetted by liberal straights, currently is the greatest threat to religious freedom in the United States. This is because homosexual radicals like lesbian Chai Feldblum (appointed by President Obama as a Commissioner on the E.E.O.C.) believe “gay rights” supersede Americans’ freedom to oppose homosexuality and gender confusion. To quote Feldblum, “Gays win, Christians lose” when the “zero-sum” game of “gay rights” versus religious freedom hits the courts.

More commentary follows the video below:

Already, we in the USA are seeing the same sort of persecution for opposing homosexuality as is occurring in Great Britain, only on a lesser scale. (See University of Illinois story over dismissed Catholic professor Kenneth Howell HERE.) It will only get worse if homosexuality- and transsexuality-based special “rights” are federalized under the proposed “Employment Non-Discrimination Act.”

(A Note on “Islamophobia”: the effort to push for acceptance of Islam — insofar as it becomes official government policy — is also a threat to liberty; however, unlike in the U.K., state punishment of “Islamophobia” in the United States has not reached a fever pitch. But isn’t it interesting how activist Muslims, who reject homosexuality as sinful and bemoan Western promotion of homosexuality, have nevertheless copied the manipulative “gay” tactic of accusing opponents of possessing an irrational “phobia”?)

Willow Creek “Leadership”?

Another key difference between the USA and Britain is that biblical Christianity is much more vibrant and common here, although of course its strength varies geographically. That is why homosexual activists are struggling to “re-interpret” the Word of God and turn it into a “gay”-affirming text. Given the crucial role that churches and pastors (should) have in maintaining our religious freedom, I have another question regarding the CBN video:

Are American churches up to the challenge of defending our precious liberty and their freedom to preach the truth about any sin, including homosexuality, uninhibited by the state?

I wonder, because here in Illinois, one very influential, trend-setting mega-church — Willow Creek Community Church, which holds annual “Leadership Summits” for pastors and Christian leaders — honored former British Prime Minister Tony Blair last year — the very same Tony Blair credited in this CBN video with ushering in a sweeping “gay rights” to the U.K. with its attendant anti-religious persecution.

Not only did Mr. Blair make Britain safe for same-sex immorality, as it were, but he helped establish a legal “anti-discrimination” system that led inexorably to Christians and moral-minded British citizens being investigated and even jailed for “anti-gay” discrimination. See this recent case of a Dale McAlpine, a British evangelist who was arrested for preaching against the sin of homosexuality (the charge against him was ultimately dropped).

As he revealed to British homosexual writer Johann Hari, Blair counts his pro-”gay rights” work as one of his singular achievements. This excerpt of Blair’s 2009 interview with Hari (in the British gay magazine Attitude) is telling:

Hari:  You are a very rare example of a person who is publicly very religious, and very pro-gay. Did you ever see a conflict between the two?

Blair: No. Not for me. Because I came to a religious faith through people who were themselves very much open and liberal on all these issues, and who would have regarded it as bizarre to have attitudes of hostility to gay people. I think it would have been, actually, the other way around. If in the end I’d felt that my religious faith was pulling me in an opposite direction, I’d have had real difficulties with it. I think that for all religions, the challenge is how do you extract the essential values of the faith from a vast accumulation of doctrine and practice? For many people, the reason for their religious faith is less to do with the doctrine and practice, and more to do with the values like love of God and love of your neighbour. And one of the things I do through my Foundation, through trying to bring different religious faiths together, to show how, actually, there is a huge common space around these values between the different religious faiths.

Like Obama, Blair conveniently ignores or dismisses biblical texts that might interfere with the noble sense of good that he associates with affirming homosexuality and “equal rights” based on same. Blair, a Catholic convert, once even lectured the pope on the latter’s “entrenched” attitudes about homosexuality.

Tony Blair was a featured speaker (by video) at Willow Creek's 2009 "Leadership Summit." Click on graphic to enlarge. The above is the cover of a DVD of the Summit (see Blair photo at bottom) available on Amazon.com.

Is this the kind of “leadership” that Willow Creek and its charismatic pastor Bill Hybels hope to spread throughout American Christendom, and the world? Blair with his New Age-ish brand of (c)hristianity certainly has “led” on homosexual rights — but doesn’t that mean that he utterly failed to model godly, biblical leadership? Would Hybels agree? Once again it’s that pesky homosexual issue — if we publicly agree with the God of the Bible on this issue, there is a price to pay in worldly fame — one apparently too great for many who still claim the mantle of moral leadership. Just ask Rick Warren, or Dr. Laura Schlessinger, or Tony Blair.

I have not seen Hybels’ 2009 Willow Creek “Leadership Summit” interview with Blair, but I would be surprised if there were any queries about Blair’s enthusiastic state promotion of homosexuality-based “rights” (the very opposite of God-given liberties) — or his campaign to synthesize his socially liberal views on sex and marriage with the historic Christian faith. Clearly, Blair was honored by Willow Creek, and Christians and lovers of religious and moral freedom everywhere have the right to ask: why?

As AFTAH readers know, in 2008 this writer and another pro-family advocate picketed Willow Creek church after its leadership agreed to meet with the homosexual activist group Soulforce. (Would WCCC also meet with pro-pornography activists demanding a meeting?) At issue is the nature of Willow Creek’s and Hybels’ “leadership” in Christian circles. It should be remembered that Willow Creek rejected numerous high-level requests to actively assist the 2006 “Protect Marriage Illinois” campaign to place a statewide referendum affirming traditional marriage on the Illinois ballot .

We will be doing more examinations into just what kind of leadership WCCC is exerting — as well as that of the larger evangelical Church — in the cultural sphere of sexual sin and marriage.

______________________________

CBN YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UZVlh3U-kc

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

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

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

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

6-12-10, Matt Barber, All

By Peter LaBarbera

Truth is often stranger than fiction these days in Politically Correct America, thanks to the Anti-Christian, Libertine Left:

Every Easter Sunday in San Francisco, the twisted drag queen group "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" hosts a blasphemous "Hunky Jesus" contest mocking the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

In three days, in what has become a sick, blasphemous Easter Sunday ritual in San Francisco, America’s “gay” Mecca, a group of homosexual drag queens — posing as mock nuns and calling themselves the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” — will sponsor the “Hunky Jesus” contest in a city park. Scantily-clad homosexual men and cross-dressing, queer “Sisters” with gaudy, painted faces will mock the Resurrection of Christ on an outdoor stage, as crude “homoerotic” jokes fly and the crowd roars with laughter. Last year’s winner: “Brokeback Jesus.” … I wish this were an April Fool’s Day joke…but it’s not. [To watch a "Hunky Jesus" contest on YouTube, go here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4fyiucdHyA&feature=related#]

An Episcopal Bishop, V. Gene Robinson — “V” stands for Vicky; his parents wanted a girl — travels the country using his once-respected church office to promote the sin of homosexuality. He does this in the name of “Christianity,” of course. Yes, Vicky Gene – who left his wife and family to pursue a “gay” lifestyle with another man — knows better than God. He believes “monogamous gay relationships” are a good thing and argues that poor Apostle Paul just didn’t understand all that we sophisticated, modern-day Westerners know about “sexual orientation.” The Episcopal Church has also approved its first avowedly lesbian bishop, “Rev.” Mary Glasspool — Chapter One of the New Testament Book of Romans be damned. … I wish this were an April Fool’s Day joke…but it’s not.

The state of Maine is on the verge of implementing “rights” for “transgender” students to use opposite-sex restrooms in schools — following the passage of a homosexual/transgender law. Grade school boys who think they’re “girls” would be able to use the girls’ restrooms…. I wish this were an April Fool’s Day joke (and so do Maine’s parents)…but it’s not.

Chai Feldblum

President Obama made a recess appointment of lesbian activist and Georgetown law professor Chai Feldblum to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC is the federal agency charged with enforcing employment anti-”discrimination” laws. Prof. Feldblum has determined that homosexual sex is “moral” and signed on to an extremist document called “Beyond Marriage” — which advocates government recognition of “committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner.” Feldblum now says it was a mistake to sign the manifesto — which also states that “Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households” – should be recognized as “families” and treated like traditional marriages. Can you spell S-e-x-u-a-l A-n-a-r-c-h-y?

Moreover, Feldblum has written that in employment, newfangled “gay rights” almost always should trump Americans’ religious freedoms — whenever the advancement of “gay equality” collides with the moral freedom of those who disagree with homosexuality (think: Boy Scouts). Thus, in the “zero-sum game” (Feldblum’s words) between homosexuals’ demands that their lifestyle be accommodated — and the liberty of religious people NOT to do so — the Christians lose. … I wish this were an April Fool’s Day joke…but it’s not.

Army Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon: rebuked for opposing Obama's plan to homosexualize the U.S. military.

A decorated general, Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander, U.S. Army Pacific, was strongly rebuked by Defense Sec. Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for publicly opposing President Obama’s plan to homosexualize the U.S. military. Gates is making it harder to report (and thus expel) open homosexuals in the Armed Forces — a clear violation of existing U.S. law banning homosexual servicemen. (Obama is above the law.) Meanwhile, Marine General James Conway, leery of Obama’s plan, has proposed homosexual-only housing for “gay” Marines — to protect the privacy of normal Marines. … I wish this were an April Fool’s Day joke (and so do many in our military) … but it’s not.

The proposed federal “Employment Nondiscrimination Act” (ENDA) [S. 1584/ H.R. 3017] would create nationwide job “rights” based on homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality – enforced by Feldblum’s EEOC. The bill would expand “civil rights” to include protection based on “gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth.” (No joke – don’t you just love Washington?) That means when Johnny’s 2nd-grade teacher, Mr. Paul Parker, decides he wants to “transition” to become “Ms. Paulette Parker,” the school must accommodate his/her deviant “gender” choice. Parents who don’t approve of cross-dressing teachers as classroom role models for their impressionable children would be told that under ENDA, the school cannot “discriminate.” Hence parents would be forced to either pull their child from the school or subject him or her to a teacher who daily models deviant, destructive conduct…. I wish this were an April Fool’s Day joke…but it’s not.

Cultural degradation, the war against Christianity, and the corruption of children are no laughing matters. It’s now or never for conservatives, Christians and moral-minded citizens to fight back to preserve our nation and its Judeo-Christian heritage. Otherwise, due to the relentless push to radically transform our society by the pro-homosexual, secular Left and its liberal media cheerleaders, the idea of America actually being a nation “under God” will become … well … a very bad joke.

_____________________________

Peter LaBarbera is founder and president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (www.aftah.org) and Republicans For Family Values (www.rffv.org), based outside Chicago.

Warren Throckmorton

Prof. Warren Throckmorton said in an interview with AFA’s One News Now published today that he supports homosexual “civil unions” and equivocated on the question of whether homosexuality is “normal, natural and healthy.” (In 2007, Throckmorton answered affirmatively to the same question when asked by radical homosexual activist Mike Signorile.) Is this what Throckmorton’s employer, Grove City College, means when it advertises itself as “authentically Christian”?

Note Throckmorton’s parsing of words in the ONN interview (below). Looking through the lens of Judeo-Christian history, to NOT discourage someone from adopting a ‘gay’ identity and practicing  homosexuality (even in a “monogamous” same-sex relationship), is effectively to promote the acceptance of homosexuality — i.e., sexual sin.

Moreover, Prof. Throckmorton seems to adhere to the notion that his Christian life and his professional “therapist” role are mutually exclusive — as if secular requirements in the current psychological paradigm supersede adherence to God’s holy and inspired Word. As AFTAH previously reported, Throckmorton’s and Regent University professor Mark Yarhouse’s “Sexual Identity Therapy” (SIT) stipulates that therapists must respect their client’s chosen “sexual identity” — whether that means rejecting a homosexual identity out of religious convictions or embracing one that “allow[s] integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity.” (p. 7)

The overriding question remains: can a faithful, Bible-believing Christian who believes it is sinful to condone immoral sexual behavior practice the SIT approach professionally — if that means NOT attempting to dissuade clients who decide they are happiest living homosexually from embracing that identity?

Perhaps the choice between faith and therapy is not as stark for Throckmorton because — despite his claim to ONN to uphold a “traditional view of homosexuality and sexual ethics” — the GCC professor affirms monogamous “gay” relationships. In 2006, the Los Angeles Times reported that Throckmorton is “uneasy that NARTH [National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality] rejects even the possibility of a fulfilling life with a same-sex partner.” Writing on his blog the day the story was reported, Throckmorton did not take issue with the L.A. Times article but in fact linked to it, noting that it had also been picked up by other news sources.

Normal,  Natural and Healthy?

I will gladly take a shot at answering the three-part question that Throckmorton answered so assuredly in his radio interview with Signorlie, but with which — in the ONN interview — he struggles, ultimately trying to split it down the middle:

“Is homosexuality natural, normal and healthy?”

• Natural? Nope. Anal sodomy and various other homosexual sex acts are unproductive perversions obviously at odds with human anatomy and God’s created design. Since two people of the same sex cannot produce a child, it is not natural (nor possible) for a child to have “two dads” or “two moms.”
• Normal? Not a chance. (Well, maybe in San Francisco, where men are allowed to walk the streets completely naked; where an “order” of male “drag queens” called “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” — with twisted names like Sister Roz Erection — are regarded as a legitimate charity; and where every Easter Sunday a city park hosts a shameful spectacle called the Hunky Jesus Contest that blasphemes the Son of God on the Christian holy day.)
• Healthy? Again, no: check out the latest CDC stats on the disproportionate disease rates for “men who have sex with men.”

It appears that in an effort to preserve his reputation, Prof. Throckmorton not only has raised more concerns about his dubious claim to to biblical fealty, but further undermined Grove City’s slogan — aimed at parents of future potential GCC students — that the evangelical college is “authentically Christian.” AFTAH will be publishing other pro-family advocates’ reactions to the ONN interview with Throckmorton.  – Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, www.aftah.org

One News Now reports:

___________________________________________________

Christian professor clarifies stance on ‘sexual identity’

Jim Brown – OneNewsNow – 3/11/2010

A professor at an evangelical Christian college in Pennsylvania says his guidelines for “sexual identity therapy” are being misunderstood by some Christian proponents of traditional marriage.

Dr. Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College says he has not lost faith in God’s ability to change people who are struggling with homosexuality, but believes most of those people are not likely to experience a “diminishment” in same-sex attraction.

Dr. Warren Throckmorton”To say that because it appears from the research that change is infrequent in attractions doesn’t mean I’ve lost my faith in God’s ability to change people,” he states.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality expressed concern on American Family Radio Monday that Throckmorton “downplays” the stories of former homosexuals “who have experienced profound change.” (See earlier story)

Throckmorton tells OneNewsNow that his “Practice Guidelines for Sexual Identity Therapy” are for professional therapists and not pastors. He denies that as a therapist he would advise clients to maintain a homosexual identity.

“The framework [for the guidelines] doesn’t encourage a client to do what the counselor thinks he or she ought to do,” says the professor. “The framework follows the beliefs and the values of the client. So to say that the counselor encourages clients any particular direction would be in error.”

Throckmorton says he personally holds a “traditional view of homosexuality and sexual ethics.” However, when asked whether he believes homosexuality is “normal, natural and healthy,” he said he could not answer that with a simple “yes” or “no” response. He said “in a professional therapy situation” it is accurate to say that “homosexuals can live normal, natural, and healthy lives that are free of mental illness.”

On the issue of same-sex “marriage,” Throckmorton says he takes a more “nuanced” view — and that he opposes same-sex marriage but believes the Equal Protection Clause permits homosexual civil unions.

“I have experienced Professor Throckmorton’s forked tongue, as he has pretended to seek ‘my side’ of the story various times, then turned around and told a biased side of the same story, in a public sphere, with the intention of discrediting my testimony and shaming my stance for Gospel truth.”
– Former homosexual activist Michael Glatze

__________________________________________________

Once "gay" turned Christian Michael Glatze

Editor’s Note: in apparent anger over Americans For Truth’s campaign to expose renegade Grove City College associate professor Warren Throckmorton’s unscriptural approach toward homosexuality, Throckmorton is questioning the accuracy of a OneNewsNow story featuring comments by AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera — including LaBarbera’s assertion that Throckmorton actively seeks to discredit bold testimonies of profound change like that of ex-”gay” Christian Michael Glatze. Below, Michael explains why he no longer trusts Throckmorton and others who “pervert the truth.” Please say a prayer of thanks for this young man who God has drawn out of homosexuality, and that God will use him mightily to proclaim truth about homosexuality in the years and decades ahead. Please also pray for Throckmorton, who as a professed Christian at an evangelical institution should not be using his authority to affirm anyone in a “gay” sexual identity. You can write either man through AFTAH at americansfortruth@comcast.net:

__________________________________________________

The Truth about Warren Throckmorton

By Michael Glatze, Special to Americans For Truth

It is funny. In this world, truth seems to almost be subjective. Then, you meet Jesus. In Jesus, truth is objective. It is from this vantage point that I write this.

Those who seek to provide some kind of intellectual “nuance” to the Gospel will, inevitably, engage in the sin of Pride. The Gospel is quite clear; and, all information about it can be found within God’s Word. Furthermore, all truth — as revealed in God’s Word — will be seen to be true in human experience, as well. Homosexuality is one of those examples.

Six years ago, I began my Christian walk. At that time, I was considered a “rising star” in the “gay rights” movement, editor of a national gay magazine, and a sought-after authority on the subject of gay youth. But, as a new Christian, I began to discover that I simply could not ignore the truth of the Gospel, no matter how difficult it may have been for my habitual, sinful nature to handle those truths. It was not easy to read things that made me feel guilty, or uncomfortable. It was not easy to go before God’s throne in humble repentance. It is still not easy to do so.

However, every time I did that, I found myself blessed — and, I found that God gave me the grace I needed to move on, to grow up, and to grow out of sinful practices that had become quite ingrained in me. This, to those who are unfamiliar, is the blessed process of sanctification. I began to understand that God’s mercy is unfathomable, yet unceasing. I began to understand that I did not have a free ride from sin and temptation, once saved. I began to feel the distance from God, whenever I followed through with a sinful temptation, or acted on that sin — i.e., the spiritual death describe so aptly in the book of James, as following the fulfillment of a sinful action.

Homosexuality, like other sins, involves the temptation to do something that is — quite simply — not necessary. To disagree with God, to say that it is OK, is to sin. And, to confess your sin is to humble yourself enough to say to God, “You were right; I was wrong.” This is an ongoing process.

A great temptation among humans is to step in-between the sinner’s relationship with God, and offer a new way out. People do this in every walk of life. People step in and say, “I know God’s Word is difficult …  let me offer you an alternate way that won’t be so painful.” People do this with philosophies, with “support groups,” and with serious academic “discoveries.”

I have come across many folks, since I first came out as opposed to homosexuality, on a path through healing from homosexuality, standing on the platform of the Gospel to fight against falsehoods about homosexuality — encouraging Christians to not falter on the Gospel truth about homosexuality, and all other sins. It is not easy, nor is life — necessarily — always a walk in the park. But, we must recognize those folks who, momentarily, play Jesus, and put themselves — or, their philosophies, or the fruits of their labors — in Jesus’ place: as mediator between God and man.

Sadly, Warren Throckmorton has been one of those people. He, like so many professing Christians, peddles a false gospel about homosexual sin that includes the lie that homosexuality “might be OK for some people.” Of course this false gospel will seem preferable for many, because it requires less moral responsibility than the true gospel. But, that does not make it right.

I have experienced Professor Throckmorton’s forked tongue, as he has pretended to seek “my side” of the story various times, then turned around and told a biased side of the same story, in a public sphere, with the intention of discrediting my testimony and shaming my stance for Gospel truth. As we have all seen, throughout Christian history, it is quite easy for people to create false worlds, to skew human perception, to persecute Christian truth. Sadly, this professor at a seemingly-reputable Christian school, has engaged in these tactics, with the outcome of persecuting the very truth he supposedly is teaching, atop his perch.

I write this now, as I recognize efforts are being made to describe his indiscretions, and — undoubtedly — a war of words will ensue. All people are redeemable; I am a profound example of that truth.

As I have said in other articles, homosexual sin is a very serious trojan horse that Satan will use — and, has used — to divide and conquer. I know, through the testimony of my own life, as a gay activist and practicing homosexual, who has been delivered from the lifestyle, from the desires, and from the whole mindset, that Gospel truth WILL prevail. But, Christians must be unafraid to tell the truth, stand for the truth, and hold those accountable who pervert the truth.

God Bless You all.

Michael Glatze

_____________________________________

From:  “Bier, David J.” [GCC e-mail address]
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:43:31 -0500
To: <americansfortruth@comcast.net>
Subject: Article on Warren Throckmorton

Dear Americans For Truth,

Your recent article on Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton is yet another of your pathetic attempts to mislead otherwise moral individuals into the belief that God disapproves of homosexuality.  Your unsolicited attack on Throckmorton isn’t surprising, but you should still know that Throckmorton has the support of the student body here.  Perhaps one day you will realize that the only thing doing “incalculable harm to many young people” is your ignorant and hate-inspired position on homosexuality.  Throckmorton’s Golden Rule Pledge simply encourages to do as Jesus did: accept others as they are, not as we want them to be.

Thanks for your time,

-David Bier, Grove City College Senior

______________________________________

Related Americans For Truth articles:

• “Is Grove City College Still ‘Authentically Christian’ if It Abides Pro-’Gay’ Professor Warren Throckmorton and his ‘Sexual Identity Therapy’?”
• “Grove City College Prof Throckmorton Misapplies the Golden Rule on the ‘Day of Silence’”

“Every piece of evidence that can be culled from the text’s literary and historical context confirms that the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice, like its prohibition of adult incestuous unions, is absolute, rejecting all forms of homosexual practice regardless of consent and commitment.” –  Robert Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary 

“St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts.  It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex.  So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so.” – Homosexual Episcopal Bishop V. (Vicky) Gene Robinson, interview with CNSNews.com

TAKE ACTION AND LEARN: Educate yourself about the Bible’s clear teaching against homosexual conduct and relationships. Begin by reading the article below, taken from Prof. Robert Gagnon’s paper, “What the Evidence Really Says about Scripture and Homosexual Practice: Five Issues, and sharing it with your Christian friends, especially those bending to pro-”gay” advocacy. And please support Prof. Gagnon by ordering his excellent 2008 DVD series, “Love, the Bible and Homosexual Practice” (cost is $42 including shipping & handling). As Christians, it is our duty to respond intelligently to false ”gay” theology, which is gaining a foothold in the Church and in the culture. And for those who are not Christian, you need to understand the bogus history that activists like (Vicky) Gene Robinson are using to advance their pro-homosexuality agenda.

_______________________________________

Dear Readers,

Please watch this short video interview of homosexual activist and Episcopal Bishop V. (Vicky) Gene Robinson’s latest attempt  to discredit the biblical (Romans 1) prohibition against homosexual practice (courtesy Eyeblast TV and CNSNews.com):

You can read a transcript of Bishop Robinson’s CNS interview HERE. It is extraordinary to behold a major denominational “Christian” leader dedicate a sizable part of his professional life to undermining the clear witness of the Bible and tradition against a particular sexual sin  — which just so happens to be the one with which he identifies. Unfortunately for Robinson, his rehashed “gay” theology does not square with history, as Prof. Robert Gagnon — the world’s leading orthodox authority on the Bible and homosexuality — reveals below.

Note Robinson’s assumption that homosexuals are ”born.” Despite the existence of a small cottage industry of pro-homosexual researchers — e.g., geneticist-turned-”gay”-activist Dean Hamer — seeking to prove inborn homosexuality, they have not succeeded in doing so. (Hamer’s media-hyped 1993 male “genetic homosexuality” study in the journal Science could not be replicated in the same journal.)

Also note that despite Robinson’s claim about innate homosexuals, the peculiar and obviously dysfunctional circumstances of his own life — starting at his birth — support a “nurture” rather than “nature” model for the causation of homosexuality. Robinson’s parents, expecting him to die, gave him two female names — Vicky Imogene — because they had hoped for a daughter. Then when he survived, they allowed him to live as a boy carrying those feminine names — a parental act that was irresponsible at best and cruel at worst. (Remember the Johnny Cash song, “A Boy Named Sue”?)

Thus, the abnormal factors that undoubtedly contributed to Bishop Robinson’s deviant proclivities and homosexual self-identification as an adult undermine his current, self-serving, specious claim that modern, “monogamous” homosexuality is some kind of benign, naturally “oriented” variation on life that was not yet discovered by the Apostle Paul. [See related AFTAH article: "Researcher: Half of Gay Couples Choose to be ‘Non-Monogamous.’"]

Prof. Rob Gagnon

Moreover, if we know that thousands of men and women have left homosexuality through faith in Jesus Christ and through various methods and circumstances — why would we treat this particular sin as somehow special and unchangeable — or not sinful at all, as long as it is “domesticated”?

Professor Rob Gagnon and other scholars — including some homosexuals — who have studied the context of the New Testament Book of Romans take issue with Bishop Robinson’s claim about monogamous homosexuality not being proscribed. TAKE ACTION AND LEARN:  Please share this article with your friends and support Prof. Gagnon (www.robgagnon.net) — a rare, indefatigable foe of pro-homosexual political correctness in the academy — by ordering his 2008 DVD series, “Love, the Bible and Homosexual Practice” (cost is $42 including shipping & handling). The excerpt below is taken from Gagnon’s 2009 paper, “What the Evidence Really Says about Scripture and Homosexual Practice: Five Issues.”

– Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

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

_________________________________________

Prof. Gagnon Responds to “Gay” Theological Arguments on the Book of Romans:

3. Romans 1:24-27 and the Erroneous “Exploitation Argument”

Claim: The Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice in Romans 1:24‐27 applies only to exploitative and hedonistic forms of homosexual practice such as sex with slaves, prostitutes, and adolescents.

What the evidence really shows: Every piece of evidence that can be culled from the text’s literary and historical context confirms that the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice, like its prohibition of adult incestuous unions, is absolute, rejecting all forms of homosexual practice regardless of consent and commitment.

Five lines of evidence make this point clear. First, Paul in Rom 1:24-27 rejects homosexual practice because it is a violation of the God’s creation of “male and female” as a sexual pair in Genesis. In Rom 1:23-27 Paul intentionally echoed Gen 1:26-27, making eight points of correspondence, in the same tripartite structure, between the two sets of texts (humans/image/likeness, birds/cattle/reptiles, male/female). Paul was rejecting homosexual practice in the first instance because it was a violation of the male-female prerequisite for sexual relations ordained by the Creator at creation, not because of how well or badly it was done in his cultural milieu.

Second, the kind of nature argument that Paul employs in Rom 1:18-27 isn’t conducive to a distinction between exploitative and nonexploitative forms of homosexual practice. For Paul contended that female-female and male-male intercourse was “contrary to nature” because it violated obvious clues given in the material structures of creation that male and female, not two males or two females, are each other’s sexual “counterpart” or “complement” (to use the language of Gen 2:18, 20) in terms of anatomy, physiology, and psychology. What Paul says regarding the vertical vice of idolatry (1:19-23) is equally true of the horizontal vice of same-sex intercourse: male-female complementarity is “clearly seen, being mentally apprehended by means of the things made” (1:19-20). Some have argued that the ancients had no comprehension of a complementarity argument. Yet as classicist Thomas K. Hubbard notes in his magisterial sourcebook of texts pertaining to Homosexuality in Greece and Rome (University of California Press, 2003): “Basic to the heterosexual position [among Greek and Roman moralists in the first few centuries A.D.] is the characteristic Stoic appeal to the providence of Nature, which has matched and fitted the sexes to each other” (p. 444). Hubbard is supportive of homosexual relationships, yet admits the point.

Third, the fact that Paul in Rom 1:27 specifically indicts male homosexual relations that involve mutual, reciprocal affections—“males, having left behind the natural use of the female, were inflamed with their yearning for one another”— precludes any supposition that Paul is thinking
only of coercive relationships.

Fourth, Paul’s indictment of lesbianism in Romans 1:26 further confirms that his indictment of homosexual practice is absolute, since female homosexuality in antiquity was not primarily known, or criticized, for the exploitative practices of sex with slaves, prostitutes, or children. And there can be little doubt that Paul was indicting female homosexuality, as evidenced by:

1. the parallelism of the language of 1:26 (“females exchanged the natural use”) and 1:27 (“likewise also the males leaving behind the natural use of the female”);
2. the fact that in antiquity lesbian intercourse was the form of female intercourse most commonly labeled “contrary to nature” and paired with male homosexual practice;
3. the fact of nearly universal male opposition to lesbianism in antiquity, even by men engaged in homosexual practice; and
4. the fact that lesbian intercourse was the dominant interpretation of Romans 1:26 in the patristic period.

Fifth, contrary to false claims that people in the Greco-Roman world had no concept of committed homosexual unions, there is plenty of evidence for the conception and existence of loving homosexual relationships, including semi-official “marriages” between men and between women. Moreover, we know of some Greco-Roman moralists who acknowledged the existence of loving homosexual relationships while rejecting even these as unnatural (indeed, we can trace this idea back to Plato’s Laws). This is also true of the Church Fathers. For example, Clement of Alexandria (late second century) referred to “women … contrary to nature … marrying women” (Paidagogos 3.3.21.3). Obviously marriage implies commitment (else there is no need to marry) yet commitment does not change the unnatural and sinful character of the relationship. And it should go without saying that Jewish writers in Paul’s day and beyond rejected all forms of homosexual activity. For example, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus stated the obvious to his Roman readers: “The law [of Moses] recognizes only sexual intercourse that is according to nature, that which is with a woman…. But it abhors the intercourse of males with males” (Against Apion 2.199).

It is hardly surprising, then, that even Louis Crompton, a homosexual scholar, acknowledges this point in his massive work, Homosexuality and Civilization (Harvard University Press, 2003; 500 pgs.):

“However well-intentioned,” the interpretation that Paul’s words were not directed at “bona fide” homosexuals in committed relationships….seems strained and unhistorical. Nowhere does Paul or any other Jewish writer of this period imply the least acceptance of same-sex relations under any circumstance. The idea that homosexuals might be redeemed by mutual devotion would have been wholly foreign to Paul or any other Jew or early Christian. (p. 114)

Also worth noting is the falsity of claims that the ancient world knew nothing akin to our understanding of a homosexual orientation or of congenital influences on at least some homosexual development. As classicist Thomas K. Hubbard (cited above) notes:

Homosexuality in this era [i.e., of the early Imperial Age of Rome] may have ceased to be merely another practice of personal pleasure and began to be viewed as an essential and central category of personal identity, exclusive of and antithetical to heterosexual orientation. (p. 386)

Bernadette Brooten, a lesbian New Testament scholar who has written the most important book on lesbianism in antiquity also acknowledges this point. She states that “Paul could have believed” that some persons attracted to members of the same sex “were born that way and yet still condemn them [better: their behaviors] as unnatural and shameful…. I see Paul as condemning all forms of homoeroticism as the unnatural acts of people who had turned away from God” (Love Between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism [University of Chicago, 1996], 244).

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

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

___________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

__________________________________

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

____________________________________________

All the bile that’s fit to print

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

Posted on WND January 13, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

____________________________

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

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and homosexual activist Dan Savage (right) ridicule FOX News' Brit Hume for saying that Tiger Woods needs Christ's forgiveness.

Well, we extolled Brit Hume and his sage advice to Tiger Woods, so now we have to give you some of the hyperventilating comments from America’s reactionary secular bigots, headquartered at MSNBC, of course. That includes the left-wing network’s chief blowhard, Keith Olbermann, who joined self-described “radical sex-advice columnist faggot,” Dan (“Three-Way”) Savage, in ridiculing Hume’s heartfelt Christian outreach to Woods.

Why on earth is Olbermann still a TV commentator for NFL games (for NBC Sports)? Seems that if the NFL cannot tolerate Rush Limbaugh as an owner, why does it allow a mean-spirited, Christian-bashing, hard-left talker to be connected to the league in any way? Let’s see if we can help to change that. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

TAKE ACTION: Please join us in urging the NFL and NBC to drop Olbermann from his NFL media duties.  Here is the NFL Comment Page and the NBC Sports Contact Page. E-mail NBC Sports directly at nbcsportshelp@nbcuni.com; or send a regular-mail letter to:

NBC Sports — Please Fire Keith Olbermann

c/o National Broadcasting Company, Inc.
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY

My good friend and AFTAH Board Member Matt Barber writes:

______________________________

The Crucifixion of Brit Hume

By Matt Barber
Friday, January 08, 2010

During the Roman Empire’s secularist era those who acknowledged the deity of Christ were frequently fed to the lions to entertain – for lack of a better word – the “progressive” elites of the day. There’s little doubt that if many of today’s secular-“progressives” (more accurately: “moonbat liberals”) had their way, Caesar Obama would call out the lions once again.

Nothing makes the left lose its collective noodle like an open proclamation of Christian faith. You don’t see it when Muslims proselytize in government schools; the ACLU doesn’t sue when Wiccans share their witchy ways; militant “gay” activists don’t picket Buddhist temples with bullhorns while inhabitants grasp at Zen. No, there’s something about Christianity that just drives ‘em nuts. Always has. Always will.

Case in point: Recently, on two separate occasions, Fox News veteran Brit Hume both publicly pronounced his own faith in Jesus Christ and boldly suggested that Tiger Woods might find “forgiveness and redemption” for his serial philandering should he “turn to the Christian faith.”

Hume first offered Tiger the advice on “Fox News Sunday” and then reiterated his sage, though decidedly non-PC council on “The O’Reilly Factor” the following night. When asked by host Bill O’Reilly what kind of response he’d received for his comments, Hume replied, in part: “It’s always been a puzzling thing to me. The Bible even speaks of it. You speak the name Jesus Christ… and all hell breaks loose.”

Yes indeed.

After Hume made his comments, and as if on cue (Lord forgive them for not knowing what they do or why they do it) liberals went apoplectic. Here’s a small sampling:

As reported by CNSNews.com: “Tom Shales, media critic for the Washington Post , in a Tuesday column, demanded that Hume apologize and called his Christian remarks ‘even only a few days into January, as one of the most ridiculous of the year.’”

MSNBC’s reliably raspy Keith Olbermann accused Hume of attempting “to threaten Tiger Woods into converting to Christianity” and demanded that his Fox News ratings superior “keep religious advocacy out of public life” (back in the closet, Brit old boy).

Olblubberman then compared Hume to a terrorist, suggesting that “the worst example” of this kind of “proselytizing” are “jihadists.” Finally, he betrayed the left’s typical anti-Christian bigotry, suggesting that Jesus may have been a homosexual and wondering aloud: “WWJDIHS: What would Jesus do if he’s straight?” [Note: the conservative "Newsbusters" blog of Media Research Center interpreted Olbermann's remarks differently -- saying that WWJDIHS refers to "What would Jesus do if he strayed"; start watching at about 3:15 in the five-and-a-half-minute MSNBC video.]

While the mainstream media’s rage was clumsily managed (or masked), unbridled hate boiled over in the left-wing blogosphere. On the sexual anarchist site, “JoeMyGod,” poster “QScribe” suggested that Brit Hume’s deceased son had been “gay” and viciously accused Hume of being responsible for the young man’s suicide: “Brit Hume still hasn’t ‘repented’ for trashing his gay son and driving him to suicide. When I want moral guidance from a pig like that, I’ll be sure to ask. Until then, he really ought to STFU.” (Hume has publicly shared that his son’s heartbreaking suicide played a large role in his acceptance of Christ.)

The next commenter went so far as to cruelly imply that Hume had sexually molested his own child and further mocked the tragic suicide, writing: “Dead victims don’t tell on their molesters.”

Commenting on the Huffington Post, “Kandaher” bypassed Hume altogether and aimed his vitriol directly at his Creator: “anyone (sic) watched ‘The passion of Christ’? I thoruhgly (sic) enjoyed it. Nothing like watching this bloke getting beaten up! He deserved what he got and more!”

You get the idea.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I must confess that I very much enjoy watching liberals go goofy when the light of truth pierces that shadowy void called moral relativism. When the left’s religion of choice – secular-humanism – is challenged through exposure to the gospel message, they almost universally and instinctively react with such visceral, knee-jerk spasms. You can set your clock to it.

But believe it or not, there’s actually something rather delightful about such hateful lashing about. These poor souls – to be pitied and prayed for – fail to realize that, manifest within their own unwittingly bizarre behavior, is certain affirmation of the very words of Christ on the subject.

Jesus addressed this peculiar and deeply spiritual phenomenon on more than one occasion over two thousand years ago. In John 15:18-20 (NIV), for instance, He reminds His followers: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.”

Now, I’m real sorry that most “progressives” and other non-believers feel that Christianity is deficiently “tolerant” or “inclusive” of various man-made religions and lifestyle choices. But it’s just not our call. Christ Himself reveals over and again that the pathway to heaven is a very narrow one, requiring membership in a rather “exclusive” club – a club wherein belief in Him and repentance from sin are the only membership requirements.

Christ said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6). Note that, rather conspicuously, He did not say: “…No one comes to the Father except through me, the Buddha, Muhammad, Ganesh, and – on Tuesdays – L. Ron Hubbard.”

But lest you have any doubt, consider John 3:36, which warns every man, woman and child on earth – past, present and future: “Whoever believes in the Son [Jesus] has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.”

So, Brit Hume had it right, didn’t he? I mean, it is kind of an all or nothing proposition, isn’t it?

As my favorite author and Christian apologist C.S. Lewis famously pointed out in his blockbuster book “Mere Christianity,” Christ could only have been one of three things: A lunatic, a liar, or – as Jesus oft claimed and as billions have believed – the sovereign Lord and Creator of the universe.

Noted Lewis:

“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” – C.S. Lewis

So, what does this all mean? Well, and please take this in the spirit (little ‘s’) intended: Brit Hume’s woolly, wily, wandering critics really ought to just un-knot their knickers; mudra, mantra or something; and seriously reflect upon the man’s words and heart.

Perhaps they should – being all “tolerant,” “diverse” and whatnot – consider, if only for a moment, the very Spirit (big ‘S’) from which came those words and was formed that heart.

In the meantime, to Mr. Hume: “Well done good and faithful servant.”

__________________________

Matt Barber [e-mail: jmattbarber@comcast.net] is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He is author of the book “The Right Hook – From the Ring to the Culture War” and serves as Director of Cultural Affairs with Liberty Counsel. (This information is provided for identification purposes only.)

“YOU will BURN IN HELL for spewing your garbage water and spreading hatred through this world. Thank GOD your views are a DYING BREED because gay rights ARE HERE FOREVER! We will all enjoy each other\’s company in heaven while you SLAVE AWAY FOR SATAN!”