WARNING: Offensive Language (required to expose hateful “gay” extremism)

Lying Leatherman: homosexual atheist blogger Joe Jervis (left) didn’t appreciate that Americans For Truth called attention to the vicious comments posted by his online followers against Patricia Mauceri (below right) — the Christian soap actress who was dumped by ABC’s “One Life to Live” after objecting to a pro-homosexuality story line. And it looks like Mauceri is not the first soap actor to object to the faith-undermining requirements of pro-”gay” political correctness in the business. Blogs like Jervis’ “Joe. My. God.” give evidence that no activists are as mean and hateful as homosexual activists — who project their beef with the Creator (unacknowledged, in Joe’s case) on to His followers.

TAKE ACTION: contact ABC and tell them enough is enough with their promotion of the homosexual agenda and sexual immorality in general. Tell them you are outraged at the politically correct firing of Patricia Mauceri (right). And ask them to cast happy, contented “ex-gays” in major TV roles and sympathetic Christian/religious characters who remain faithful to their faith convictions — for the sake of diversity. 

________________________

Ah, I see that Joe Jervis (above), the non-average “Joe” behind the homosexual activist “Joe. My. God.” blog, has focused his intellectual energies (or should I say bigoted, emotional impulses) into crafting a response to AFTAH’s post about his blog yesterday. We were simply highlighting some of his buddies’ crude and very mean attacks on Patricia Mauceri, the Christian soap actress who says she was fired for objecting to a pro-homosexual story line.

Here is the essence of Jervis’ response:

1. I have a comb-over hair style (ouch — problem here is I have so little hair to comb over — if this were true it would really be an exercise in futility: see tragic evidence at right);
2. I’m really a gay-porn-obsessed homosexual (hence the nickname: “Porno Pete”: this smear term was actually invented by Wayne Besen, the truth-challenged professional homosexual zealot behind the “ex-gay”-bashing group “Truth Wins Out”; some “gay” activists have stopped using Porno Pete in favor of the much more mature “The Peter” — peter being a boyish slang term for the male sex organ);
3. I have a small penis (note the continuing theme: Jervis is a gay “leatherman,” so we’ll cut him some slack on this one since by definition he has an unhealthy interest in male genitalia);
4. I am one of the biggest homosexual “closet cases” on the Internet (here Joe is applying that strange and creepily self-hating homosexualist putdown: the more you criticize the homosexual agenda, the more you are likely to be a secret homosexual yourself. Applying this curious standard to other causes, right-wing Republicans covertly support Obama and can’t wait to have their taxes raised — and lurking inside every pro-life activist is a person yearning to kill unborn babies).

Let’s see. Am I forgetting anything? Well, Jervis has filed his response under these categories:

• assholism (I didn’t know that was a word);
• closet cases (lest you forget that I, Peter LaBarbera — father of five and happily married for 20 years — am a covert homosexual-wannabe; Joe wrote a previous piece on me entitled — this is not a joke – “Peter LaBarbera Wants To Have Sweaty Mansex With Every Single One Of You”; strangely, I couldn’t find the “mansex” post among the AFTAH-bashing pieces on Jervis’ site – don’t tell me you’re embarrassed about that one, Joe?);
• needledicks (see #3 above);
• Peter LaBarbera

Wow, you must be doing something right when your name is an actual category on several “queer” websites. (One nasty homosexualist website uses my last name as an “award” to put down other conservatives fighting the “gay” agenda.) Jervis ends with a swipe at me for not allowing reader comments on the AFTAH website, but frankly, it would require a full-time staffer just to monitor the infantile, crude and hate-filled posts that would end up as “comments” on Americans For Truth’s site. And that doesn’t even factor in the “gay” activists who would pose as “Christian fundamentalists” to post irrational, homosexual-bashing (even violent) comments to make conservatives look bad. (This is not to say that there are no wacky fundamentalists like Fred “God Hates Fags” Phelps out there, but AFTAH has denounced such extremism — as opposed to atheist Jervis, who stokes it on his website.)

Christians, pray for this New York City blogger Joe Jervis, a lost soul if there ever was one. The same “Jeebus” (Jesus) he and other Christian-bashers mock one day will judge them (2 Timothy 4:1 and 4:8). Homosexual activists like Jervis seem to project their own hatred — of God’s moral law — against the pro-family advocates who are only trying to defend it. (Jervis has a special animus against AFTAH because our actions put a damper on the disgusting leather orgies that he supports.) Thankfully, it’s never too late to cease the rebellion and come back to God; they didn’t call them “gays” but there were “homosexuals” and former homosexuals in Bible times (note emphasis):

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

___________________________________

TAKE ACTION: contact ABC and tell them enough is enough with their promotion of the homosexual agenda and sexual immorality in general. Ask them to cast happy, contented “ex-gays” in major TV roles and sympathetic Christian/religious character who remain faithful to their faith convictions — for the sake of diversity. 

FoxNews online reports:

Soap Actress Says She Was Fired Because of Religious Beliefs

Friday , September 04, 2009
By Lauren Green

If you tuned in to the soap “One Life to Live” this week, you may have noticed there’s been a change of character. One character in particular.

Actress Patricia Mauceri says she was fired and abruptly replaced for objecting to a gay storyline because of her religious beliefs.

Mauceri played the recurring role of Carlotta Vega on “OLTL” for the last 14 years. But when she objected to how the writers wanted her deeply religious character, a Latina mother, to handle a storyline involving homosexuality, she objected. And for that she claims she was fired.

Mauceri, 59, a devout Christian, told FOX News that character Vega’s gay-friendly dialogue was not in line with the character she helped create by drawing on her own faith.

“I did not object to being in a gay storyline. I objected to speaking the truth of what that person, how that person would live and breathe and act in that storyline,” she said. “And this goes against everything I am, my belief system, and what I know the character’s belief system is aligned to.”

Mauceri said she was replaced despite offering changes to the script and hoping for a compromise.

An ABC spokesperson said they were not aware of any such claims by Mauceri, adding such claims “would be frivolous.”

When asked why Mauceri is no longer playing Carlotta Vega, the spokesperson said the show does not comment on personnel matters. The scene in question was scheduled to air Friday afternoon.

Mauceri told FOX News she is exploring her legal options. AFTRA, the actors union that represents her, did not respond to a request for comment.

Where’s the media frenzy? Duke University official Frank Lombard is accused of raping his adopted 5-year-old son and attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with the boy. The same media and Duke professors who were all over the bogus 2006 Duke lacrosse “rape” case are not interested in this horrifying homosexual adoption-rape story.

_____________________
Folks, the jaundiced liberal media deserves much blame for the deterioration of American culture and the collective erosion of morality. Political correctness and identity politics destroy common sense by shielding favored classes and causes from criticism. Ask yourself: what logical reason is there that Matthew Shepard not Jesse Dirkhising is a household name in this country? (And don’t respond that Shepard was targeted “just because he was gay” because that is not true.)

This creep Frank Lombard and anyone — straight, “gay” or bisexual — convicted of the rape of a young child like this ought to be a candidate for automatic life imprisonment without parole or the death penalty, in my view. Homosexuals may not yet have achieved full “protected class” status in the law, but they sure have achieved it in the media. Kudos to WorldNetDaily and UNC professor-scribe Mike Adams for taking up the watchdog role to which journalists with integrity once aspired. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

_______________________

WorldNetDaily reports:

______________________________

News agencies gagging gay’ factor in boy rape

But coverage beyond bonkers or fake Duke lacrosse assault

By Joe Kovacs, WorldNetDaily, posted July1, 2009

Editor’s note: The content of this story is graphic in nature and may be objectionable to some readers.

News coverage of a Duke University official accused of raping his adopted 5-year-old son and offering the child to someone else is apparently lacking what some say is a key piece of information: the fact the alleged perpetrator is a homosexual who lives with another “gay” man.

Frank Lombard, associate director of the Health Inequalities Program at the university’s Center for Health Policy, was arrested last Wednesday in Raleigh, N.C., for attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with the child, who is black.

The arrest affidavit goes into graphic detail of Lombard’s alleged actions, including alleged performance of oral sex with the child in front of a webcam, and sodomizing the boy with his finger and tongue. It also prominently cites the fact that Lombard is a homosexual living with another “gay” man.

In his online profile, Lombard reportedly describes himself as “perv dad for fun.”

But days after the case broke, there have been few, if any, mentions in news stories that Lombard is part of a homosexual couple raising children.

In reports by the Associated Press, CNN and ABC News, for instance, the “gay” factor is never brought up.

A Lexis-Nexis news database search by WND using search terms “Frank Lombard” and “homosexual” or “gay” resulted in just four results, none of which were any major media.

Just today, Duke’s campus newspaper, the Chronicle, finally mentioned the affidavit where it was stated, “he lived in Durham, North Carolina with his live-in homosexual partner.”

An online comment in reaction to the ABC News story mentioned media hypocrisy with the high-profile case of Duke lacrosse players who were wrongly accused of a rape that never happened:

“The Duke lacrosse case was front page news everywhere, professors were signing statements of protest, another professor threatened to resign in protest when the students were readmitted to Duke when found innocent. Could it be the liberal media and professors are as afraid of the gay lobby as Obama is, since this could harm the gay adoption activists?”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh commented today on the apparent double standard, stating, “Did you hear there has been an actual rape at Duke University? An actual rape in Durham, North Carolina. It’s not a phony one. Not a false charge. An actual rape. A guy sold his adopted 5-year-old son to a sex practitioner. A 5-year-old kid, yeah. There’s a problem with this, too, because the guy is gay, a gay adoption.

“This is why you haven’t heard about it. This does not fit the template. A false charge of rape at Duke when you had the poor, black, down-on-her-luck dancer and the rich, white, lacrosse players, oh, that fit the template. They were guilty before any evidence. This you haven’t heard about because this doesn’t fit the template here of what we’re trying to accomplish.”

The silence is reminiscent of the 1999 homosexual rape and murder of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising of Prairie Grove, Ark. Many news agencies across the nation ignored coverage.

Among those trying to shine the light on the homosexual aspect of the Lombard case is Mike Adams, a professor of criminology at the University of North Carolina-Wilmington.

“I tried to contact Frank Lombard over the weekend to probe his expertise regarding the health benefits of raping small children,” wrote Adams. “So far, he’s declined to comment.”

Lombard faces a maximum of 20 years in prison if convicted.

______________________

Joe Kovacs is author of “Shocked by the Bible: the Most Astonishing Facts You’ve Never Been Told.”

CLICK ON PHOTO TO ENLARGE. Chicago’s CBS TV affiliate fields a float every year at the city’s bawdy homosexual “pride” parade, but CBS and other major Chicago secular media were no-shows at AFTAH’s pro-family coalition press conference yesterday highlighting a huge and growing pro-family boycott of McDonald’ s (based outside Chicago). McDonald’s was given a high 85% rating by a homosexual lobby group for its pro-homosexuality and pro-transsexuality policies. Photo courtesy Illinois Family Institute.

Dave Diersen, an Illinois Republican activist, has provided a summary of the coverage of our press conference in front of McDonald’s’ world headquarters in Oak Brook, Illinois. Predictably, I suppose, we were completely blacked out by Chicago’s and Illinois’ major media — which had no excuse since they were inundated with press releases about the event by four pro-family organizations taking part: Americans For Truth, American Family Association, Illinois Family Institute and Liberty Counsel. It appears that the Fox News item below came from AP.

So once again the major media are doing the work of the homosexual lobby. Many in the media have decided that the “gay” issue is settled, and the homosexual activists have won. (Remember when Big Media thought the abortion issue was pretty much over?) Yesterday’s non-coverage was appalling journalism, even by corrupt Chicago standards. Clearly, the boycott story is compelling — even from a pure business perspective: already, nearly 200,000 people have signed AFA’s boycott petition (www.boycottmcdonalds.com).

The people involved in this boycott of McDonald’s are good family people — not vegans, America-hating leftists, or some other fringe group. And the idea really seems to be catching on. As I said yesterday, millions and millions of Americans have had it with the elite media’s and pop culture’s promotion of homosexuality, but they don’t know what to do about it. Boycotting McDonald’s, an easy target but admittedly not the worst corporate offender — PepsiCo Foundation recently gave $500,000 to the homosexual group Human Rights Campaign Foundation, compared to McDonald’s $20,000 to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce — is something simple to do to stand up for marriage and the natural family.

More coming on this story. — Peter LaBarbera

P.S. Most major Chicago media either field floats or participate in the annual Chicago “Gay Pride” parade, and the local ABC affiliate televises it (see photo above). Now there’s some “news” with wide appeal in Chicagoland!

______________________________

Dave Diersen writes:

[Note for those outside Illinois: the "combine" derogatorily refers to Chicagoland Democrat and Republican politicians and interests that work together (corruptly) to advance their own political and monetary interests irrespective of party and principle.]

News clips and upcoming event information:
GOPUSA ILLINOIS
VERY SAD BUT NOT SURPRISING: The Combine gets its news media members to keep the McDonald’s boycott off their websites – Dave Diersen
www.gopillinois.com
The American Family Association and other groups have called for a boycott of McDonald’s because it promotes homosexual activity. It is very sad, but not surprising, that the Combine got its news media members to keep the boycott off their websites. The boycott was announced at an outstanding 10:00 AM press conference yesterday at the McDonald’s restaurant across from McDonald’s world headquarters in Oak Brook. Because the Illinois Democrat Party Platform promotes homosexual activity and the Illinois Republican Party Platform discourages homosexual activity, the boycott is a political story. I was hoping to see Mary Ann Ahern, David Beery, Mike Flannery, Rick Preason, Andy Shaw, and other political reporters at the press conference, but I did not. Speakers at the outstanding press conference included Matt Barber, Peter LaBarbera, Sandy Rios, and David E. Smith. Sadly, McDonald’s is a member of the Combine. Hopefully, Illinois Republican Party (IRP) Chairman Andy McKenna Jr. will get his father, Andy McKenna Sr., the President of McDonald’s, to get McDonald’s to stop promoting homosexual activity. Also, hopefully, he will get his father to cancel McDonald’s membership in the Combine. IRP Chairman Andy McKenna Jr. was scheduled to meet with DuPage County Republican Central Committee (DCRCC) leaders in Wheaton this evening. Hopefully, all this will be discussed during that meeting and summarized in a DCRCC press release.

FOX NEWS CHANNEL
– Christian Group Boycotts McDonald’s for Supporting Gay Chamber of Commerce
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,383561,00.html
(THE ARTICLE: OAK BROOK, Ill. – A Christian group that opposes same-sex marriage launched a boycott of McDonald’s because of the fast-food chain’s support for the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. American Family Association president Tim Wildmon says almost 200,000 people have signed an online pledge to boycott McDonald’s for promoting homosexuality instead of remaining neutral. McDonald’s spokesman Bill Whitman says the company has made a financial contribution to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, and a McDonald’s executive serves on the chamber’s board. He insists that doesn’t mean that McDonald’s supports “a particular lifestyle or same-sex marriage.”)

LIFE SITE NEWS
– Family Advocates Take McDonald’s Boycott to Home of the Golden Arches After “Hate” Smear – Peter Smith
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08071602.html
(FROM THE ARTICLE: OAK BROOK, Illinois, July 16, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The boycott against McDonald’s over its public support of a gay lobby group pushing same-sex “marriage” has now escalated, as the pro-family groups the global hamburger giant accused recently of “hate” have brought the fight right to the home of the famed Golden Arches. The American Family Association (AFA), Americans for Truth, the Illinois Family Institute, and the legal advocacy group Liberty Counsel held a joint press conference Wednesday in front of the McDonald’s restaurant across from McDonald’s corporate headquarters in Oak Brook, Illinois to protest the corporation’s statements that people opposed to its support of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC), were motivated by “hate.” . . . The AFA boycott petition may be found here: http://www.boycottmcdonalds.com/ Contact info for McDonald’s: Andrew J. McKenna, President, McDonald’s Corporation USA, McDonald’s Plaza, Oak Brook, IL 60523 Phone: 1-800-244-6227 or: 630-623-3000 Fax: 630-623-5004)

DAKOTA VOICE
– Protest at McDonald’s HQ Over Promotion of Homosexual Agenda – Alexander Sheffrin
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2008/07/protest-at-mcdonalds-hq-over-promotion.html
(FROM THE ARTICLE: McDonald’s, however, has been unapologetic about its pro-gay stance, asserting that organizers of the boycott are motivated by a hateful agenda against homosexuals. “Hatred has no place in our culture,” McDonald’s USA spokesman Bill Whitman told The Washington Post. “That includes McDonald’s, and we stand by and support our people to live and work in a society free of discrimination and harassment,” he explained. But the AFA is arguing that its boycott is about the record of McDonald’s and its duty to be a responsible and neutral corporation. “This boycott is not about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald’s, or how homosexual employees are treated,” the AFA said. “It is about McDonald’s, as a corporation, choosing to put the full weight of their corporation behind promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage,” the group explained. In an e-mail to boycott supporters, Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth, which organized a press conference outside McDonald’s headquarters Wednesday, said that the accusations of “hate” and prejudice from McDonald’s were a reflection of the food chain’s own deeply embedded anti-Christian views. “When we’ve reached the point where belief in the Bible and traditional morality is routinely equated with hatred, America has become hostile territory for people of faith,” he said. “Sadly, ‘diversity’ is becoming a corporate code-word for anti-Christian bigotry – forcing people of faith to imbibe politically correct ideologies that violate their beliefs,” he added. According to a press release, boycott organizers “are encouraging families to do two things: sign, print and distribute a Boycott McDonald’s petition at www.boycottmcdonalds.com; and call the local McDonald’s to politely tell the manager they are boycotting the chain until it stops promoting the gay agenda.”)

WICHITA EAGLE
– Not ‘lovin’ it’: McDonald’s supports gay group – Brent Castillo
http://www.kansas.com/opinion/castillo/story/465759.html
(FROM THE ARTICLE: Bigot. Homophobe. Hater. These are the terms that many gay activists and their supporters use to label you if you oppose gay marriage, or believe homosexuality is immoral. What is surprising is to see the spokesman for McDonald’s USA, Bill Whitman, incorporate some of the same rhetoric when justifying the company’s support and involvement in the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. The chamber lobbies Congress on a wide range of issues, including the promotion of same-sex marriage. “Hatred has no place in our culture,” Whitman said in an interview with the Washington Post. “That includes McDonald’s, and we stand by and support our people to live and work in a society free of discrimination and harassment.” The “hatred” he is referring to is the American Family Association’s call for a boycott of the restaurant chain.)

PAM’S HOUSEHOLD BLEND
– DIERSEN HEADLINE: VERY SAD: “tfeminist” a) denigrates Christians as being “religious wingnuts” and “kooks” and b) defends McDonald’s promotion of homosexual activity
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showComment.do?commentId=69952
(THE POSTING: My view on McDonalds – McDonalds is a corporation based in eastern DuPage county. As much as DuPage gets a wrap for being conservative, lets be clear, the wing nut section is in Wheaton, eastern DuPage is some pockets of liberalism and corporate conservatism. The eastern part of DuPage draws employees from Cook and Chicago. It is really just a gigantic corporate office park, especially Oak Brook. McDonalds, secondly exists in Illinois and is a stones throw from “gay friendly” Chicago (I still love the fact that Mayor Daily turned down the Republican Convention saying he was to busy with the gay games). They have to play to Dem Politics to keep State Tax incentives. Illinois is not going to turn red any time soon, the state has become indigo, as younger blue collar folks, and their white collar brethren are starting to share a common political vision for the state. Dem Politics in Illinois, has become pro-queer as a result. Some of it has to do with the increasing progressive nature of the state, and some is pure economics. They want the state to be a “creative class” one that rivals California. They have done a pretty good job of it so far. The state is without question getting an increasing amount of corporate relocations, sees major Hollywood movies regularly (both Batman and Wanted were filmed there). McDonalds, wants to be part of this effort, they have strong ties with the interests of the state and the City of Chicago. McDonalds, a long time sponsor of the Olympics, also wants to see the games in their back yard. So to say they have increasing ties to the democratic party in the state would be an understatement. They may as well be a million miles from these religious wingnuts, they exist in another political reality and honestly are not influenced by these kooks. Their reality that is more about tax incentives, the Olympic games in Chicago and recruiting, than right wing boycotts, really don’t have much of an impact. Either way, I am encouraged that McDonalds is ignoring the boycott. When it gets down to it the company has always been one that success is tied to urban areas and urban politics more than anything. I am not saying McDonalds is great, rather . . . that they are a corporation that exists in Illinois and influenced by the politics of the state. A corporation that exists in a pragmatic reality unaffected by right wing politics, and more centered on their own corporate interests.)

The following article first appeared in the May 20, 2008 edition of “Culture Links,” the e-mail newsletter of the Culture and Media Institute. You can sign up for Culture Links on CMI’s informative website:

The Supreme Court of the nation’s largest state redefined the most important relationship in human society, marriage, and the networks lost interest in the story in one weekend.

On Thursday, California’s top court issued its decree ordering California to allow same-sex couples to “marry.” The networks carried the story on their Thursday evening broadcasts, but by Sunday, only one of the Big Three networks’ weekly public affairs shows bothered to discuss it. ABC’s This Week devoted a paltry two minutes to this monumentally important topic.

The liberal media treated the story one-dimensionally, as an historic victory for civil rights and the inevitable wave of the future, with a brief quote or two from opponents as a sop to balance. This isn’t surprising, given the media’s commitment to the homosexual agenda.

As I have witnessed personally, most of the big newspapers and major broadcast and cable networks sponsor the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA, pronounced “negligee”). They also recruit at NLGJA conferences. The media, both news and entertainment, have accepted the gay activist perspective that homosexuals deserve special civil rights protections that are now based on race, ethnicity, disability or sex.

Judging from the one-sided coverage of this court decision, the news media also have embraced gay activist principles about handling stories related to homosexuality. NLGJA member Ramon Escobar: “When we cover the black community, I’ve never seen a newsroom where you’re covering one side and then you have to go run out and get the Klan’s point of view.”

Sorry, Ramon, but this is a story with two sides. On one side, what’s best for homosexuals. On the other, what’s best for society as a whole.

Marriage is the institution that holds together the basic building block of society, the family. When marriage is strong, families are more likely to be healthy. Healthy families produce capable children who enable society to survive for another generation. When marriage is weak, families and children suffer, and eventually society pays the price. The media are failing abjectly to explore the implications of this decision for marriage and the family.

Here are a few points the media ought to be discussing in depth, if they would remove their ideological blinders:

Decline of marriage. Reports from European countries that have already gone down the civil union and same-sex “marriage” road are not encouraging. Scholar Stanley Kurtz warns that “gay marriage is both an effect and a cause of the increasing separation between marriage and parenthood.” According to Kurtz, “Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.”

Proliferation of family structures. Same-sex “marriage” sets a terrible legal precedent. Once we’ve stepped outside the traditional boundary of one man, one woman marriage, we have no objective basis for denying marriage to any other combination of consenting adults. Certain standards are already being undermined. HBO is producing a cable TV show, Big Love, that desensitizes viewers to polygamy. In recent weeks we’ve also seen news stories that treat non-judgmentally, or even sympathetically, brother-sister and father-daughter incest.

Experimental childrearing. How do we know that these alternate family designs will produce healthy children as effectively as the nuclear family? Do we have the confidence, and the moral authority, to experiment with the next generation of children? A meta-analysis of “gay parenting” studies assembled by two pro-gay researchers at the University of Southern California and published in American Sociological Review [1] acknowledges what the media refuse to report: Growing up in a same-sex household does make kids more open to homosexuality and less gender-specific behavior, a finding the authors applaud.

Church-state conflicts. If same-sex “marriage” is the law of the land, what happens to churches that refuse to marry same-sex couples, or hire people in same-sex relationships? In last week’s episode of ABC’s Boston Legal, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston lost its tax-exempt status for refusing to allow a woman to become a priest. Boston Legal is just a television show, but in real-life Boston, Catholic Charities was forced to cease placing orphans for adoption because it refused to put children in homosexual households. Won’t real-life churches that oppose the state’s view of “civil rights” inevitably have their tax-exempt status challenged, or worse?

Infringement on free exercise of religion. Companies owned by devout Christians or Jews have no protection whatever against being forced to subsidize what their faiths inform them is sinful behavior. The media have ignored California’s already Draconian law forcing businesses to provide marital-type benefits to gay partners or be banned from contracting with the state government.

What about the schools? In Massachusetts, where the courts and former Governor Mitt Romney imposed same-sex “marriage” in 2004, the state has introduced pro-homosexual propaganda into the public schools.

Do the American people still govern themselves? California’s Supreme Court directly overruled the California public’s overwhelming preference to restrict marriage to opposite-sex couples, which is based on the traditional understanding that marriage is the unique, complementary joining of the two sexes, and widely held consensus that homosexual behavior is morally wrong. Same-sex “marriage” is not really a constitutional conflict. It’s a clash between two values systems—the secular-elite vs. the traditional-religious. Who are the elite courts to overrule the moral values of the majority? The media clearly side with the secular elites in this debate.

The lessons of history. Oxford anthropologist J.D. Unwin wrote Sex and Culture, the definitive study of why civilizations collapse. Unwin found that societies that practice “absolute monogamy,” in which sex is restricted to lifelong heterosexual marriage, tend to grow and prosper. Societies that open the sexual Pandora’s box and depart from absolute monogamy invariably decline. They become insignificant backwaters or disappear altogether.

Whether America should embrace same-sex “marriage” is a profoundly important question that needs to be fully aired. By not examining the enormous stakes, the media are allowing a razor-thin majority of California Supreme Court justices to have the final word.

CMI Director Robert Knight contributed to the above article.

1. Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz, “(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?” American Sociological Review, Vol. 66, No. 2 (April, 2001), pp. 159-183.

The following is the Executive Summary of the Culture and Media Institute’s (CMI) special report, “Apostles of Atheism: How the broadcast and print media helped spread the Gospel of Godlessness in 2007,” by Kristen Fyfe. Click HERE for the full report in HTML, and you can view the PDF Version HERE.

[Related AFTAH articles: "Chuck Norris on the Marketing of Atheism to Young People"; "Homosexuality and Atheism."]

CMI’s Fyfe writes (emphasis added):

_____________________________

By Kristen Fyfe, Culture & Media Institute

Only eight percent of Americans are atheists, according to the National Cultural Values Survey,* yet atheism was the “it” religion in 2007, with just three best-selling books generating much of the media coverage. Christianity Today put the topic at No. 2 in its Top 10 list of religion stories for last year. “The Roar of Atheist Books” was the seventh biggest religion story of 2007 according to Time magazine.

Media indifference and even hostility toward religion in general and Christianity in particular has been well documented by the Media Research Center for years. With the ascendancy of atheism as a “religion” story, the Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute wondered whether the media gave atheism the same degree of scrutiny as Christianity and other religious faiths? To assess the news media’s coverage of atheism in 2007, CMI examined the morning, evening, late night and weekend news programs on all three broadcast networks, all issues of the three leading weekly news magazines (Newsweek, Time and U.S. News and World Report), and four programs aired on taxpayer-funded National Public Radio (Morning Edition, Weekend Edition, All Things Considered and Talk of the Nation).

CMI found 105 stories either featuring atheism or introducing the views of atheists while reporting on other issues. Among the key findings:

• 80 percent (17 out of 21) of feature stories about atheism or atheists had a positive tone, exemplified by Time’s December 3 story on a Sunday school for atheists. 20 percent were neutral. No feature stories were negative.
• Atheists were used to challenge religious viewpoints more than journalists used religious viewpoints to challenge atheism. Fifty-four percent of atheist-themed stories included a religious counterpoint, but 71 percent of the Christian-themed stories included atheist counterpoints or were written from an atheistic perspective. The most striking example was Newsweek’s choice of avowed atheist and Mother Teresa-basher Christopher Hitchens to critique a book detailing Mother Teresa’s spiritual struggles.
• Atheism stories or commentaries by atheists were present in 51 percent (25 of 49) of the issues of Newsweek and 35 percent (17 out of 49) of the issues of Time. This included features, mentions in stories on other issues and groupings of letters to the editor from atheists. In sharp contrast, only one issue of U.S. News and World Report referred to atheism.
• ABC provided the most enthusiastic television network coverage of atheism, exemplified by features on an atheist Web site called Blasphemy Challenge and an atheist convention held in Baltimore. The network addressed the subject 24 times in five of its six news programs. This number is just under the combined total for CBS (16) and NBC (11). ABC also aired more produced packages (5) on the subject than CBS (4) and NBC (2). ABC’s Nightline devoted an entire program to a live debate between atheists and Christians.
• Six out of seven news organizations considered in this study addressed the concerns and interests of atheists in the upcoming presidential election. Only Republican candidates for President were asked how they would treat atheists.

This report concludes that, whether deliberately or not, the news media did not subject atheism or atheists to the same skepticism to which they subject Christians and Christianity. By airing unchallenged interviews and reporting predominantly positive-toned features, the news organizations in this study effectively promoted atheism and held it in higher regard than other religions. While the media are not obligated to treat all religions and belief systems equally, their failure to subject atheism to the levels of skepticism directed at Christianity and other religions suggests a deplorable double standard.

Using atheism as a foil against Christianity, but not against any other religion, suggests an anti-Christian bias. If journalists call on atheists to comment on one religion, they should use atheists to comment on all. Further, if reporters use prominent atheists to offer opposing views on religion-themed stories, they should –– in equal measure –– invite leading believers to provide perspective on stories about atheism. Journalists who look at America’s majority religion through a skeptical prism should equally apply their critical faculties to atheism.

* The National Cultural Values Survey was conducted for the Culture and Media Institute in December, 2006.

Click HERE for the full CMI report, “Apostles of Atheism” in HTML
and HERE for the report in PDF format

By Kristen Fyfe
Culture and Media Institute
May 9, 2008

Kevin and Scotty will exchange vows on the season finale of ABC’s Brothers and Sisters Sunday night. And the actor who plays “Kevin,” Matthew Rhys, told USA Today, “It’s all very progressive, evolved and about time.”

In a story about the atypical TV wedding, USA Today’s reporter William Kleck mentioned that the show is “liberal leaning” but “does attempt to recognize those who oppose gay “marriage” by introducing Scotty’s parents, who skip the ceremony. That volatile relationship is expected to be explored in Season 3.”

Kleck also mentioned that another character’s children will witness the gay commitment ceremony and the actress who plays the mom hopes viewers won’t “have a problem with that.”

Click HERE to read the rest of the CMI story

Dear Readers: check out this recent Good Morning America story (you can watch the ABC video online) about an alleged “pregnant man” — who is actually a very gender-confused Oregon woman who is pregnant but has taken drastic measures to appear like the “man” she wants to be. What continues to irritate us in the reporting on the radical “trans-genda” is the media’s obsequiousness in using biologically false pronouns to describe the stories’ subjects. Of course, this is the exact goal of radical groups like GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) and GenderPAC.

Breaking news to the PC media: Laurie Higgins is right: men still cannot get pregnant.– Peter LaBarbera

____________________________

By Laurie Higgins

I’ve said this before, but in light of a recent “news” story that describes the strange tale of a “pregnant man,” I think it bears repeating.

Prior to my mother succumbing to cancer, she had had an oophorectomy, hysterectomy, and mastectomy. Following those surgeries, she was no less a woman than am I. The presence in the pregnant woman of a desire to be a man, a clear symptom of a profound psychological disorder, and even the foolish legal accommodation of this symptom, renders this woman a man only in an illusory post-modern fantasy–not in reality where most of us live and breathe and have our being. That is to say, there exists no pregnant “man.”

Oh, and by the way, I still believe I’m a hobbit trapped in a human body.

Laurie Higgins is a writing instructor at Deerfield High School, in Deerfield, Illinois, north of Chicago. She can be reached through AFTAH at americansfortruth@comcast.net.

Friends, heads up: ABC’s “Boston Legal” tonight (10:00 P.M. EST) will help further the radical “gay” agenda of opening up the America’s Armed Forces to open homosexuals — during wartime, no less.
 
The homosexual-bisexual-transsexual movement hypes its victimhood but it has incredible power and money as a small special interest group in society. At bottom, a well-heeled homosexual activist group, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), touts the “Boston Legal” episode, which probably could have been written by the SLDN itself, such is the propagandistic nature of pop culture today. If I were a gambler, I’d wager that the script advances the bogus “gay” activist analogy to ending racial discrimination and makes conservative opponents of homosexuals in the military out to be a “bigots” and irrational “homophobes.”

Crazed military “homophobes” have been a favorite target of liberal Hollywood snobs for years — remember Chris Cooper’s character in “American Beauty” — who of course turned out to be a repressed homosexual himself?

To read some outstanding articles clarifying current military policy and the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy deviously put in place by President Bill Clinton in 1993 — it does not conform to U.S. law — I recommend Elaine Donnelly’s Center for Military Readiness. Start with “Why the Law Did Not Get a Name of its Own.”  Elaine is a hero for truth on this and other military issues.

Aren’t you tired of the media’s and Hollywood’s round-the-clock promotion of all things homosexual? I am. And yet, remember this: they have the money, the influence, the elite network of behind-the-scenes and public backers of their cause. But we have the truth: homosexual behavior will always be wrong, and those who defend and practice it are fighting their own “war” — against a Creator who lovingly made man and woman to enjoy each other and beget children in marriage.

[Note to readers: the preceding paragraph was falsely attributed to Elaine Donnelly as a quotation by Ed Brayton, a homosexual advocate, writing for the Michigan Messenger.]

Meanwhile, the unheralded stories of changed EX-homosexuals like Charlene Cothran, an African-American who, with God’s help, overcame 29 years of lesbianism, expose as a lie the homosexual activists’ central “civil rights” premise of inborn “gay” identity. This debate is really over behavior, not “orientation” — and If homosexual behavior does not belong in the military, why would we allow in people who define themselves by that behavior?
 
Stay strong and don’t let the media decide YOUR morality. God bless,
 
Peter LaBarbera
Americans For Truth
www.americansfortruth.org
 
P.S. You can see Charlene’s and David Parker’s exciting testimonies at Americans For Truth’s recent banquet by ordering the DVD below. All proceeds will benefit AFTAH as we seek to counter the rich and powerful homosexual lobby:
 
Order Cothran’s and David Parker’s Testimonies on DVD and support AFTAH!
To order a complete DVD (or CD) of both Charlene Cothran’s and David Parker’s outstanding talks at the recent Americans For Truth banquet, make an online donation of at least $25 postpaid to Americans For Truth (please use the online form to specify ‘2007 Banquet DVD’). You can substitute an audio CD but you must request this specifically. To order by regular mail, send your check or money order specifying “2007 Banquet DVD” (or CD) to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.

Bulk orders available: 2 for $40; 3 for $55; 4 for $70; add $10 for each additional DVD or contact us (630-717-7631) for large bulk order pricing.

____________________________

Here’s the SLDN e-mail promoting “Boston Legal’s” pro-homosexual episode:

Emmy-Winning Series Boston Legal Tackles “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Tonight on ABC    The Emmy Award-winning drama Boston Legal tackles discrimination, homophobia and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” tonight on ABC.     Tonight’s episode, titled Do Tell, involves the case of law partner Denny Crane’s Army buddy, General “Fitz” Fitzgerald.  Fitz shows up at the law firm of Crane Poole & Schmidt to tell Denny that he is gay . . . and he’s being discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”  While Denny grapples with the surprising news about his friend’s sexual orientation, Shirley Schmidt (played by Emmy winner Candice Bergen) takes up Fitz’s case, suing the Army and challenging “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in court.    For more information, visit ABC’s official Boston Legal website, or read more about tonight’s episode at Frontlines or The Bilerico Project.  And check back on SLDN’s blog tomorrow morning for a full analysis of Do Tell.      Boston Legal airs tonight at 10pm EST on ABC.

The following is Allyson Smith’s first installment on the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) conference in San Diego — which she attended representing Americans For Truth. Note the casual mixing of homosexual media with “mainstream” media – all sharing and strategizing around a pro-gay perspective — and the complete lack of opposing voices present at the NLGJA panels. (Allyson tells me that at one panel on “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell,” the moderator said that opponents of homosexuals in the military were invited to speak but declined to attend.)

All this begs the question of whether homosexual reporters working in establishment media can truly be objective — i.e., fair and balanced –  especially when they are assigned to cover homosexual-related issues. Also, note that for ease of reading, we have not put quote marks around the word “gay” as we would normally do. – Peter LaBarbera

By Allyson Smith

Gay Activists & Journalists Mingle and Strategize Together at National Gay Journalists Conference: Day 1 at the NLGJA

On Thursday, August 30, I attended the first of three days of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association convention, held at the Westin Horton Plaza Hotel in downtown San Diego. Although I have been to many homosexual conferences and events since the dawn of the millennium, at times using my real name and at other times an assumed name, this would be my first time to attend such a convention as a totally “out” Christian conservative reporter under the auspices of an organization many homosexual activists hate: Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), headed by longtime pro-family activist Peter LaBarbera.

“What will all these homosexuals do,” I wondered, “once they find out someone from Americans For Truth is here? Will they kick me out? Will they try to embarrass me? Will they call me names? Will they just ignore me?”

Having “prayed up” before arriving at the NLGJA convention, I felt that deep peace which passes all understanding as I opened the Westin’s door. After checking in at the registration desk – so far, so good – I headed to the first session, titled The Right Approach: Covering LGBT Conservatives.

Wayne Besen ’Outs’ Me
Entering the conference room, I encountered session moderator Wayne Besen. Besen is the executive director of Truth Wins Out, described on its website as “a non-profit think tank and educational organization that counters right-wing disinformation campaigns, debunks the ex-gay myth, and provides accurate information about the lives of GLBT people.” Besen is also author of the books Anything But Straight: Debunking the Scandals and Lies behind the Ex-Gay Myth and, most recently, Bashing Back: Wayne Besen on GLBT People, Politics and Culture.

[Editor's Note: for more on Wayne Besen, see AFTAH's posts: Wayne Besen Has Been Taking his Hate Pill again; ‘Gay’ Militant Seeks to ‘Shut Down’ Americans For Truth and Files False Complaint to Illinois AG; CWA Interviews LaBarbera Regarding Deceptive Wayne Besen Complaint.]

It wasn’t the first time I’d encountered Besen that day. Earlier in the morning, while I was still at home getting ready to go to the convention, his name had appeared in my inbox as the result of his copying me on an e-mail discussion he was having with pro-family advocate Guy Adams of ValuesUSA, over the cause of Idaho Senator Larry Craig’s recent bathroom bust. According to Besen, such episodes occur because “fundamentalists” “drive people deep into the closet (or ex-gay ministries, a fancy closet).” Adams and other conservatives, on the other hand, had attempted to point out that homosexual behavior is actually the cause.

Thus, this e-mail conversation was fresh on my mind as I met Besen in the conference room doorway. He glanced at my name badge, noting that I was with AFTAH. I shook his hand, introduced myself, and told him that Peter LaBarbera had sent me. Using the epithet he coined and by which a few of the more nasty homosexuals activists refer to Mr. LaBarbera, Besen in turn told me to say hello to “Porno Pete.” (Ironically, the conference would later feature a session about how to cover stories involving name-calling against homosexuals.)

“Now, just wait,” I thought, “he’ll announce me to the whole room.”

Besen opened the session by introducing the other three “LGBT conservative” panelists:  Dan Blatt, a Los Angeles-based writer who blogs on the GayPatriot.net website and founded the Log Cabin Republican Club of Northern Virginia; Scott Olin Schmidt of West Hollywood, an elected member of the 42nd District Republican Central Committee who also serves on the executive committee of the Los Angeles County Republican Party; and James Vaughn, director of Log Cabin Republicans of California, who said it’s his job to tell Republicans why they’re wrong.

That Larry Craig was on many conference-goers’ minds was evident when Besen fired off his first question to the panelists, asking them for their take on the scandal.

Blatt responded that there had been “terrible saturation” coverage by the media and that Craig had exercised “terrible judgment.” Schmidt said, “This isn’t a gay issue; this is an issue of people who pursue anonymous sex.” Vaughn asserted that Craig’s behavior “shows how dangerous the closet is.” Most of the scandals, he said, came from people living in the closet, not those who live as open homosexuals.

About 20 minutes into the discussion, Besen announced, “We have a friend of ours here, Allyson, from Americans For Truth Against [sic] Homosexuality.”

Waving my hand, I said light-heartedly, “I’m from the right wing. I’m the opposition researcher.” Many people in the room laughed. “I’m friendly; I don’t bite,” I assured them, and the discussion continued.

GOP Drifting ‘Gay’-ward?
Besen asked what it’s like for a gay Republican to walk into a party convention. “Is it better or worse than when you walk into a gay bar?” Here he was joking about his expose a few years back exposing that John Paulk – then an ex-gay spokesman with Focus on the Family – had visited a homosexual bar while on a business trip to D.C.)

The gay Republican, Vaughn, drew laughter as he answered, “Absolutely. It is much easier . . . to walk into a Republican convention and say you’re gay than it is to walk into a gay bar and say you’re a Republican.” Vaughn said he’d been having a lot of meetings recently with elected officials — and that most of them or their staffers said, “We’re with you,” and that homosexuality is not an issue for them.

Vaughn said that conservative groups like Lou Sheldon’s Traditional Values Coalition can’t hold a meeting that would fill a small conference room these days, when in the past they used to fill convention centers, “because they’re just not relevant anymore. They’re fading; they’re going away. People are getting over the gay issue.”

“What we lack in the Republican Party is not support. What we lack is leadership,” he said, confirming that elected officials have told him privately they support same-sex “marriage” but don’t dare say so publicly for fear of their constituents’ reactions.

Blatt, the Los Angeles writer, confirmed a similar experience, saying he finds it easier to be gay in Republican circles than to be Republican in gay circles. Libertarian in many of his views, Blatt said he does not support hate crimes legislation or the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), because he favors less government.

Schmidt asserted that there is a big divide between activist Republicans and the rank-and-file. “Most Republicans are moving toward the center.”

Blatt said, “The party knows it can’t win by being anti-gay.” Vaughn added that if enough GOP leaders “come out” in favor of homosexual issues, it will help to change the party’s rhetoric.

As I was leaving this session, a young woman approached and asked if she could interview me. She turned out to be a Georgia State University student who was attending the conference, along with several other college students from throughout the United States, to report on the NLGJA conference proceedings. According to the NLGJA conference booklet, this is the 10th year that student journalists have come to the convention. We made arrangements to conduct the interview later in the day.

‘Gay Games’/Clear Channel Media Marketing
The next session I attended was Mainstream Media and the LGBT Press: Co-opting or Cooperation? Moderated by Court Passant, executive producer of CBS News on Logo, the panel included Cynthia Laird of the homosexual newspaper Bay Area Reporter, San Diego Union-Tribune writer Pat Sherman, Jared Cohen of Clear Channel Communications, and Kevin Boyer, director of public relations and marketing for All Terrain in Chicago.

Cohen described his experience being interviewed by Clear Channel. Cohen told the interviewer that, if hired, “I would develop a gay and lesbian wing for Clear Channel,” adding that he explained a model and a method for a national development that could be tailored to local markets. “Two years later, we’re in 19 markets . . .”

Boyer discussed some of the strategies and methods he used to publicize the 2006 “Gay Games,” held in Chicago. He said that he had to do a mainstream public relations effort because he wanted the mainstream media to report on the Gay Games the way the LGBT press would, through sports stories, business stories, and the like. [The event was covered that way by the local, Chicago-area media – especially the Chicago Sun-Times, which also sponsored the “Gay Games” -- as if an event for homosexual athletes was something of daily interest to the media-consuming public. – Editor]

Boyer said he employed one strategy for the mainstream press and another for the homosexual press. Key themes were “inclusion,” “everybody enjoys sports,” “personal best,” and “straight people are always welcome at the Gay Games.” With the mainstream media, he helped educate reporters on homosexual issues; did athlete profiles, making sure to include men, women, elders, youth, and heterosexuals; and promulgated the message “This is a human interest story, not just a gay story.”

Cynthia Laird talked about some of the areas of cooperation and dissension between the mainstream media and the homosexual press. For example, she said there was a lot of support in the mainstream media for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” after General Peter Pace commented that homosexuality is immoral. On the other hand, she said, mainstream papers fail to give credit to GLBT papers. 

Citing Bill Gates’ recent $26.2 million investment in PlanetOut, Pat Sherman said the gay press is not in danger of being usurped by the mainstream media. “People will always want to go to the gay press” because it can provide history that the mainstream press cannot.

Sherman later added that there is room for both types of media, but the gay press may have to adapt and move toward niche publications, since it lacks the money or resources of the mainstream media.

During the question and answer period, discussion ensued regarding whether homosexual newspapers should report the names of men arrested for public sex. David Webb, a staff reporter for the Dallas Voice, noted that the Dallas police department has begun publicizing names and wondered how such stories should be reported if they involve prominent gays. One respondent said both the good and the bad must be reported.

After this session, I gave an interview to the college student.

Hillary Goes to ‘The Advocate’
Sponsored by the Gill Action Fund and Gill Foundation, organizations founded by Denver software entrepreneur Tim Gill to advocate and finance homosexual causes, the luncheon plenary was themed 40 Years of The Advocate: A Conversation with Anne Stockwell. The Advocate is a national homosexual magazine and website.

However, editor-in-chief Stockwell was unable to participate, so the magazine sent publisher Michael Phelps and deputy editor Rachel Dowd in her place. During the plenary, which was moderated by homosexual blogger and news reporter Rex Wockner, Phelps and Dowd discussed how The Advocate, whose parent corporation is PlanetOut, has evolved and stays relevant, as well as upcoming style and editorial changes planned for the magazine.

Dowd said “The Advocate used to be the only place to hear gay news, and now that’s just not the case . . . We’re not only covering same-sex issues, but we’re also covering things the New York Times is covering.”

When Wockner asked what the magazine will do to make gay people want to pick it up, Phelps answered, “We do a lot of exclusive interviews that you can’t find anywhere else.” An upcoming issue, he said, would feature an exclusive interview with [a major Democratic presidential candidate]. “She decided to do an interview with gay media, and of course sees The Advocate as the one and only place so far. And for a presidential candidate to come and seek you, a gay publication, this far in advance, really is groundbreaking.”

Larry Craig, Covering ‘Public Sex,’ and ‘Emotional Entrapment’
Wockner brought up the Larry Craig scandal and noted that there are some questions he hasn’t seen answered yet: “Why is it illegal to tap your foot in a bathroom? How is that breaking the law? To what extent was he [Larry Craig] entrapped into this?”

“How are you going to cover this story?” Wockner asked the panelists.

The Advocate’s Dowd said she had been involved in an editorial meeting about that topic just the previous day. “When did the bathroom become a beat? It’s kind of an odd question. So that was one angle we were actually looking at.” Another angle, said Dowd, is “perspective.” “We reached out to [former New Jersey governor] Jim McGreevey to write a piece for us on what happened to Larry . . . and it’s from his perspective. We look at it as a Republican phenomenon, what’s going on of living a double life, but that Jim understands perhaps emotional entrapment as being in Congress, and how political personas and political life creates a natural closet.”

Not all was sweetness and light, however, in the open question and answer period that followed. One audience member said, “I don’t feel The Advocate has much relevance to me and my life as I get older” because he isn’t familiar with a lot of the pop culture personalities it features. Another complained that the magazine used to address police entrapment issues, but not anymore, and wondered how many readers had canceled subscriptions as a result.

Gays in Charge of Gay Images
The final session I attended was Gay Panic: LGBT Media Merger Mania, where participants discussed mergers within the homosexual media and whether “gay” media will ever merge with “straight” media.

Moderated by Libby Post, a nationally syndicated commentator on homosexual issues for Q Syndicate and WAMC/Northeast Public Radio, the panel included Stephen Macias, a senior vice president at here! Networks; Sue O’Connell, publisher of Bay Windows, New England’s largest homosexual newspaper; Fred Kuhr, editor of Press Pass Q; editor Kevin Naff of the Washington Blade, “the nation’s oldest and largest LGBT newspaper;” and Joanne Jacobson, vice president of business development and operations at Logo, MTV Network’s homosexual cable channel, whose parent company is Viacom.

Post asked Macias how media mergers impact the way the gay community sees itself. He answered that one benefit is “you have gays and lesbians in charge of gay and lesbian images, whether it’s a media company that is as enormous as Viacom or an independent company like our company predominantly being run by gays and lesbians.”

O’Connell talked how homosexual community newspapers lose local flavor when they are owned by large conglomerates, harkening back to the early days of the homosexual press: “We were all picking up the mimeographed bar rags, and we were not looking at them to see where our rights were coming from. We were looking at them to see where drag night was going to be held.”

Kuhr lamented the fact that there are often identical stories on homosexual websites such as Gay.com and Advocate.com because they are owned by the same parent company.

In response to a questioner who said he still picks up the Washington Blade every Friday but no longer reads it because it lacks “local voices,” editor Naff responded in part, “I always tell people, ‘Write something.’” O’Connell agreed, citing the difficulty getting and keeping good writers due to the fact that they can now write for the mainstream press or blogs, as well as the poor pay.

As she said this, I nodded my head, remembering some of my own experiences as a freelance writer trying to collect payment. Fred Kuhr noticed and said, “Even she’s nodding.”

“We have the same issues in the conservative press,” I said.

One audience member asked Jacobson why there was no one from the gay press, yet there were non-journalists like lesbian rock musician Melissa Etheridge, on the panel during the recent presidential forum on homosexual issues, which was broadcast by the MTV offshoot Logo.

Jacobson replied that she had been at Logo from the beginning, and that she was one of the people who “pitched” Logo to Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone. “Is everything we do perfect? No. But were we able to do a national forum where these guys were seen in 28 million homes about issues that are important to us? Yes. Would I have picked Melissa Etheridge personally? I’m not answering that question (laughter). . . Afterwards, the quotes that were picked up [were hers], and everyone said that she really had the voice of the community.”

After this session, I left the conference for the day, missing the LGBT Media Summit Closing Reception, the Chapter Meet & Greet, the NLGJA Newcomers’ Reception, the Welcoming Reception with remarks by NLGJA national president Eric Hegedus (whose column equating pro-family critics of homosexuality to racists can be seen HERE on the NLJGA site) and executive director David Barre, and a screening of the documentary film Tell – a film critical of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy on homosexuals.

Look for the Next Installment on the 2007 NLGJA Conference

The photo at right appeared in the homosexual newspaper Dallas Voice’s story on Allyson Smith, who attended the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists (NLGJA) conference in San Diego representing Americans For Truth. Smith received a lot of attention at the annual event as a lone voice opposed to homosexuality. The NLGJA event is financed and sponsored each year by “mainstream” media corporations, including FOX News, which also recruited there. 

The following article first appeared on the blog of Mike Heath, who directs the Christian Civic League of Maine, and who is Chairman of the Board of Directors at Americans For Truth. As one who has both attended several National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA) conferences (openly, as a critic), and even spoken as a panelist at one, I will add that the NLGJA events have an odd mix of activism and journalism. They prominently feature activists like Besen who can fairly be described as pro-homosexual culture warriors, but they also are attended by professional journalists who claim to be objective, mostly as open homosexuals. (I would suspect that the typical media consumer has no clue that the NLGJA reporter they’re reading, watching, or listening to is “gay.”) 

Wayne’s predictable jibes are far less important than the question of whether openly (or “closeted”) homosexual journalists can cover homosexuality-related issues with any semblance of objectivity and fairness. — Peter LaBarbera 

A ‘Christian Crusader’ amidst the World of ‘Gay Journalism’
By Mike Heath | September 7, 2007

Most of us don’t even know that there is such a thing as a homosexual press.  If someone told us there was one we’d look at them askance and wonder which airport bathroom stall they just crawled out of.  Alas, not only is there such a thing … it is thriving.  How do I know?  It wasn’t FoxNews that told me.  Turns out FoxNews sponsors the homosexual press, and recruits from their ranks.  Fox was one among many familiar news sources who showed up to sponsor the National Gay and Lesbian Jounalist Association convention in San Diego a couple weeks ago.

One intrepid truth teller took time to show up.  Allyson Smith, a San Diego resident, attended the entire conference representing (openly) Americans For Truth.  It is important to know that Allyson lives in San Diego.  Truth tellers about homosexuality in the west have learned to live on fund-raising fumes.  It is harder to raise funds for truth telling about homosexuality than it is for Larry Craig to figure out his “intent.”  If Smith didn’t live in San Diego, the important and underrated organization Americans for Truth wouldn’t have had anybody at the conference.  They don’t have the money.  It is easy to raise money by loving all things gay, hating gays or helping gays.  It is hard to raise money to tell the truth about the so-called “gay” movement.

Send your check today to Americans for Truth by visiting their website HERE.

Since Allyson Smith was close by, she was able to attend the conference that was a sinkhole for immorality — sponsored by many in the mainstream media.  Maybe it would be more accurate, given the news these days, to describe the conference as a toilet down which the objectivity and credibility of the media is being flushed.

I’ll bet you didn’t know there’s a homosexual newspaper called “The Dallas Voice.”  Being that this Convention was for journalists it is only right that they would practice on Allyson.  The Dallas Voice wrote a story about Allyson’s presence entitled “Christian Crusader.”  While they obviously use the term “crusader” to evoke scary images of Muslim fanatics, Allyson is — I’m sure – undeterred.  Allyson, unlike most people today, knows what the Crusades were really all about.

Included in the “Voice” article about Allyson is the token soundbite of what passes for “gay” reasoning these days.  Wayne Besen is a master.  He is the one the “Voice” turned to for a quote.  Besen allows that Allyson is nice, and turns her kindness around on her.  He perverts, if you will, her motives.  No surprise that a master of perversion would use this tactic, I suppose.

Then Besen is quoted indicating that Allyson represents something terribly evil and insidious.  He says that, “Her sole purpose of being at this conference was to demean and smear gay and lesbian people and to distort and twist everything that was said. That was her mission.”  He then concludes, “they are just really trying to take away your rights and essentially put you in a cage by passing sodomy laws and having you arrested.”

In the lexicon of gay-speak, “demeaning and smearing” is what reasonable people call truth-telling.  If you don’t believe me, just go to the Americans for Truth website and read it.  There is nothing “demeaning or smearing” on it.  And, the only distorting and twisting I’ve seen over the years has been done by “gay” activists.  They are always distorting and twisting everything.  Everybody knows that.

The last point Besen makes might be worth addressing.  He suggests that we want to take away rights and jail homosexuals.  There is a problem with this argument.  There is no such thing as a legal right to do wrong.  Think about adultery.  Homosexuality is morally no different from adultery.  If there were a loud and powerful adultery rights group clamoring for rights, would that mean that adultery isn’t wrong anymore?  Substitute any sinful behavior.  You see what Besen is doing.  I don’t know what the technical word is to describe this rhetorical twisting and distorting, but I’m no fool.  Only fools are drawn in by arguments like this.  There are many fools around today, aren’t there?  You need look no further than FoxNews.

The Bible says that only the fool says in his heart that there is no God.  Paul the Apostle tells us in Romans that the end of foolishness is vile affections for one another.  Paul reports that the public embrace of homosexuality is a clear sign of Godless priorities.

Thank God for courageous truth tellers like Allyson Smith.  Go and read the truth today.  Go to the Americans for Truth website.

As at past NLGJA conferences, conservative-leaning Fox News Network was among the sponsors and recruiters.

Titled “Breaking Stories, Breaking Waves,” the convention, held in downtown San Diego’s Westin Horton Plaza hotel, featured a one-day LGBT media summit, six receptions, and more than 50 sessions and workshops ranging from “Covering LGBT Conservatives” (oddly, the Christian-conservative-bashing Wayne Besen was a panelist), to “Will Gays Matter in ’08?” to “Sex Writing for Fun and Profit.”

Attendees included print and broadcast professionals from top U.S. mainstream news agencies such as CNN, Associated Press, ABC/Primetime, NBC, CBS, Fox News Network, Hearst Newspapers, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Bloomberg News, Newsday, the Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times, New York Post, CNBC, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Time Warner/Turner Broadcasting, Washington Post, Hartford Courant, People Magazine, NPR, Clear Channel Communications, Wired Magazine, Cox Enterprises, and USA Today.

Among major homosexual media outlets represented were the Washington Blade, Dallas Voice, San Diego’s Gay and Lesbian Times, GO Magazine, Gay News Watch, Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), Bay Area Reporter, IN Los Angeles Magazine, Sirius OutQ Radio, CBS News on LOGO, and here! Networks.

Other organizations who sent employees to the convention, according to an attendee directory distributed with the registration package, included Cirque de Soleil; MGM Mirage; USC Annenberg School of Communications; Human Rights Campaign (HRC); Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund; Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN); Arizona State University Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication; JetBlue Airways; Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard; several Canadian tourism agencies; Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN); Lambda Legal; Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation; Out and Equal Workplace Advocates; Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Bureau; and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The convention included plenary sessions on the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and immigration issues affecting homosexuals, as well as a general session featuring a conversation with Larry Kramer, founder of the AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power (ACT UP), a radical, “in your face” demonstration group that made headlines in December, 1989, for disrupting a Catholic Mass and destroying a consecrated Communion host at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City.

The Canadian Tourism Board was the presenting sponsor for the convention. Other sponsors included JetBlue Airways, CBS News, CNN, ESPN, General Motors, Toyota automobiles, Orbitz, Bloomberg, Coca-Cola,  the Gill Foundation, Sony Pictures and Television, visitBritain, ABC News, Fox News Network, the San Diego Union-Tribune, and the Washington Post.

Among “Career & Community Expo” participants were the Associated Press, Dow Jones, Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation, MGM Mirage, Reuters, Dallas Convention and Visitors Bureau, the New York Times, Fox News Network, and NBC Universal.

Other events occurring during the convention included a student projects, a documentary film screening, a “not so silent” auction, 12-step meetings, and a “San Diego Night Out.”

Americans For Truth sent reporter Allyson Smith to the convention for three days, where she attended more than a dozen sessions and raised issues of concern to pro-family advocates — including the biased manner in which “mainstream media” covers homosexuality-related issues. A full report about the sessions that Smith attended will follow in coming days.

 TAKE ACTION:

1. Call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or write them (http://www.congress.org/) and politely urge them to support Dr. James Holsinger, Jr. as Surgeon General; the members of the Senate Health Committee, which will first consider Holsinger, can be found HERE (e-mail the committee at: help_comments@help.senate.gov) – but Holsinger’s nomination will likely be voted on by the whole Senate, so tell your Senators to use their influence to insure that he is treated fairly;
2. Thank the White House (202-456-1111 or -1414; e-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov; www.whitehouse.gov/contact) and urge the President to stand by Dr. Holsinger and not to be swayed by the pro-homosexual lobby’s distortions and anti-Christian bigotry;
3. Tell your friends to support Dr. Holsinger with a quick e-mail or call.

Click HERE TO READ DR. HOLSINGER’S 1991 PAPER, “PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF MALE HOMOSEXUALITY,” which liberal, pro-homosexual groups are distorting to discredit him.

 __________________________

Dear Americans For Truth Reader, 

By Peter LaBarbera 

Folks, anti-Christian homosexual activists and their liberal allies are out again in force to take down another good man — Dr. James Holsinger, Jr., President Bush’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General – who happens to agree with the ancient Judeo-Christian moral understanding of homosexual practice as unnatural, unhealthy and wrong.

The ABC report below is Orwellian in its framing of the campaign against Dr. Holsinger – a Christian medical doctor (cardiologist) who also holds a doctorate in anatomy and physiology. Holsinger is being vilified because he wrote in 1991 that male homosexual sex practices are unhealthy, and because he believes that men and women can abandon homosexuality.

The ABC report below — which includes a politically correct quote by the spokesman for the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) — implies that Holsinger’s writings, such as his 1991 paper, “Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality,” are obsolete and way outside of the scientific mainstream. Hello… Has there been some change in human anatomy (perhaps some hyperactive “evolutionary” mutation in the last 16 years) that suddenly makes rectal sex between men natural and good for the human body?

Please take a few minutes to read Dr. Holsinger’s 1991 paper, reprinted on our website. It was written for a United Methodist Church committee studying homosexuality. See for yourself if the paper has the ring of extremism. Here’s an excerpt:

From the perspective of pathology and pathophysiology, the varied sexual practices of homosexual men have resulted in a diverse and expanded concept of sexually transmitted disease and associated trauma. “Four general groups of conditions may be encountered in homosexually active men: classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with hig gel la species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, hepatitis non-A, non-B, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (fecal incontinence, hemorrhoids, anal fissure, foreign bodies, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)” (Owen, 1985).

Project Smear-the-Good-Doctor Has Begun 

The “gay” activist reaction to Holsinger’s appointment was as swift as it was condemnatory:  

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, in a statement opposing Holsinger’s nomination, ominously states, ”Holsinger authored a 1991 paper titled ‘Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality,’ which essentially equates homosexuality with disease in lurid terms.”

 

Our reliable nemesis, Wayne Besen, never one to let facts and reason get in the way of some good Christian-bashing, writes of the man he calls “Dr. Discrimination”: “Holsinger is an ideologue whose medieval medical views on gay and lesbian people resemble sorcery more than sound science.” For more Besen-isms on Holsinger, click HERE.

 

The “Reverend” Troy Plummer, director of an outfit called the “Reconciling Ministries of United Methodist Church,” made this very un-’reconciling’ remark about Dr. Holsinger: ”For the last 20 years, James Holsinger has been the worst kind of bully inside the United Methodist Church…  As a member of a sexuality study team in 1991, he used his position as a medical doctor to promote skewed and inaccurate information regarding gay men.” 

 

And Human Rights Campaign (HRC) President Joe Solmonese took Dr. Holsinger to task for being part of a church that helps homosexuals change their lifestyle: “Additionally, Holsinger and his wife were founders of Hope Springs Community Church which, according to the church’s pastor, ministers to people who no longer wish to be gay or lesbian. The pastor, the Rev. David Calhoun, said that the church has an ‘ex-gay’ ministry. ‘We see that as an issue not of orientation but a lifestyle,’ Calhoun said. ‘We have people who seek to walk out of that lifestyle.’ This type of ‘ex-gay’ conversion therapy has been condemned by almost every major, reputable medical organization — including the American Psychological Association, which issued a condemnation more than 10 years ago.

 

“Although the church’s theology isn’t being nominated, this discredited practice purports to be a psychological and medical service, and if Dr. Holsinger is involved in any way, it conflicts with his duty to accept and promote sound science in the interest of public health,” continued Solmonese.

Solmonese’s remarks testify to the “gay” movement’s increasingly brazen anti-Christian bigotry. The fact is, thousands of men’s and women’s lives have been changed through ex-”gay” ministries and church outreaches to bringing healing to people with unwanted homosexual attractions. So the Left is now calling for “investigations” into Christian nominees’ churches?

It is also telling that none of the above radical homosexual groups put a link to Dr. Holsinger’s 1991 paper on their web statements slamming his appointment. If the paper is such good proof of his poor credentials for Surgeon General, why don’t they make if available for all to see?

Incidentally, Carol Lloyd of Slate magazine has another (predictably liberal) take on the Holsinger paper, in a piece called “Hot, Homophobic Pseudoscience.” Lloyd highlights a few portions of the paper and then asks, “Is any else getting hot here”?

Sure, Carol, there’s no aphrodisiac quite like reading descriptions of diseases and bodily damage stemming from deviant sex acts like homosexual sodomy. 

Mysteriously, Slate, too, avoided a direct link to the supposedly awful paper. She linked to HRC’s website but, as we noted, that also has no link to the 1991 paper. Suddenly, it seems, all the high-tech liberals have forgotten how to link to easily available documents to make them accessible to all! 

Can’t Let Facts Get in the Way 

In its online story, ABC News ran the headline, “Homosexuality Isn’t Natural or Healthy,” above this mischievous sub-headline for the Holsinger story: “Bush’s Choice for Top Doc Compared Human Genitalia to Pipe Fittings and Said Homosexual Practices Can Cause Injury or Death.”

Perhaps it is big news to ABC, but isn’t it a reality of America’s post HIV/AIDS landscape that homosexuals men (i.e., “men who have sex with men,” or MSM), comprise an easy majority of all AIDS cases, so why is it a stretch to say that “gay” acts have caused death? 

The premature death of homosexuals and the massive health risks of men having sex with other men is the pink elephant in the room that “gay” activists are desperate to deny is there, despite the evidence all around them. This explains why one homosexual group, the Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center, caught flak from fellow “gay” activists when it launched a campaign with the message: “HIV is a gay disease. Own it. End it.” 

Regarding “pipe fittings,” here’s what Dr. Holsinger wrote:

It is absolutely clear that anatomically and physiologically the alimentary [relating to the digestive tract] and reproductive systems in humans are separate organ systems; i.e., the human does not have a cloaca. Likewise it is clear that even primitive cultures understand the nature of waste elimination, sexual intercourse, and the birth of children. Indeed our own children appear to “intuitively” understand these facts. I think we should note that these simple “scientific” facts are the same in any culture — patriarchal or matriarchal, modern or primitive, Jewish or gentile, etc. The anatomic and physiologic facts of alimentation and reproduction simply do not change based on any cultural setting. In fact, the logical complementarity of the human sexes has been so recognized in our culture that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming various pipe fittings either the male fitting or the female fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other. When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and diseases may occur as noted above. 

Gee, controversial, hateful stuff. Here is the ABC News report on Dr. Holsinger, with our commentary in red:

‘Homosexuality Isn’t Natural or Healthy’
Bush’s Choice for Top Doc Compared Human Genitalia to Pipe Fittings and Said Homosexual Practices Can Cause Injury or Death 

By JAKE TAPPER
June 7, 2007 —

President Bush’s nominee for surgeon general, Dr. James W. Holsinger Jr., wrote a paper in 1991 that purported to make the medical argument that homosexuality is unnatural and unhealthy. Doctors who reviewed the paper derided it as prioritizing political ideology over science, and Democratic aides on Capitol Hill say the paper will make his confirmation hearings problematic, if not downright bruising.

Holsinger, 68, presented “The Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality” in January 1991 to a United Methodist Church’s committee to study homosexuality. (Read the paper [PDF copy] here.) The church was then considering changing its view that homosexuality violates Christian teaching, though it ultimately did not do so. Relying on footnotes from mainstream medical publications, Holsinger argued that homosexuality isn’t natural or healthy.

“A confirmation fight is exactly what the administration does not need,” said David Gergen, a former adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton, who predicted the paper would cause a “minor storm” among Democrats on Capitol Hill.

“You have to wonder given the quality of some of the nominations that have gone forward recently, whether the selection group in the White House has gone on vacation,” Gergen said. “There has been a growing criticism the administration favoring ideology over competence, and this nomination smacks of that.”

[Note that ABC News and Tapper do not quote a single non-administration conservative, pro-family or GOP leader in support of Dr. Holsinger.]

White House Avoids Direct Response to Paper
In its response to the controversy Thursday, the White House avoided directly discussing the controversial paper.

“Dr. Holsinger has dedicated his life to the care of others and public service and his respect for all is evidenced by his actions and his career ,” said White House spokesman Emily Lawrimore. “On numerous occasions, he has taken up the banner for under represented populations and he will continue to be a strong advocate for these groups and all Americans. Dr. Holsinger is a highly respected, well-qualified physician and educator. His impressive medical background, which includes leading one of the Nation’s largest healthcare systems, decades of service in the armed forces, along with his commitment to combating childhood obesity, will serve him well as Surgeon General. We urge the Senate for a swift confirmation.”

HHS: Paper Not Reflective of Holsinger’s Thinking
But Holly Babin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Heath and Human Services — the agency that will take the lead on trying to achieve Holsinger’s confirmation — insisted that the paper was by no means reflective of Holsinger’s thinking.

“That paper was a survey of scientific peer-reviewed studies that he was asked to compile by the United Methodist Church, it’s not that he was saying ‘this is what I believe,’” Babin said. “It’s a reflection of the available scientific data from the 1980s. It should be noted that in 1991, homosexuals were banned from the military and several years before that, homosexuality and Haitian nationality were considered risk factors for HIV/AIDS. Over the last 20 years, a clearer understanding of these issues has been achieved.”

[Backtracking rarely works in the face of aggressive attacks: of course the 1991 paper reflects Holsinger's views. Moreover, medical studies and the CDC continue to point to the immense health risks of male homosexual and bisexual behaviors. See our story, " ‘Gay’ and Bisexual Men at 17 Times Higher Risk than Straights for Anal Cancer: CDC."  Recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) re-affirmed its lifetime ban on blood donation from men who have had sex with other men.]

Asked about medical experts who disputed that Holsinger’s paper expressed opinions timely in 1991 and pressed to explain what Holsinger’s views on homosexuality are currently, Babin said, “we look forward to the confirmation process, where we can share Dr. Holsinger’s qualifications and views.”

Advocacy Groups Protest Nomination

Those answers will likely not quell the controversy. Critics say the paper certainly seems to be written from Holsinger’s point of view.

Noting that Holsinger also belongs to a church that offers a ministry to “cure” gays of the sexual orientation, gay and lesbian rights advocates immediately protested Holsinger’s nomination. “His writings suggest a scientific view rooted in anti-gay beliefs that are incompatible with the job of serving the medical health of all Americans,” said the Human Rights Campaign in a statement. “It is essential that America’s top doctor value sound science over anti-gay ideology.”

[Again, why doesn't Tapper quote an independent pro-family advocate here in support of Dr. Holsinger? Tapper would probably say that the Bush administration official he quoted serves as the "pro-Holsinger" spokesman, but the ABC reporter's piece is heavily stacked with opposition comments, so it would have been fair to include remarks from the Family Research Council or another conservative, pro-family organization.]

Democrats will likely be sympathetic to such arguments. Holsinger’s confirmation hearing, which has yet to be scheduled, will be heard by the Senate Health Committee, chaired by longtime gay rights advocate Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. Members of the committee include three Democratic presidential contenders … eager to prove their bona fides during the primary season to the gay and lesbian community.

Holsinger, a professor of preventive medicine at the University of Kentucky College of Public Health, did not return calls for comment.

When announcing his nomination on May 24, Bush said that as “America’s chief health educator, [Dr. Holsinger] will be charged with providing the best scientific information available on how Americans can make smart choices that improve their health and reduce their risk of illness and injury.”

What Holsinger’s Paper Argues
Holsinger’s paper argued that male and female genitalia are complementary — so much so “that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming pipe fittings either the male fitting or the female fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other.” Body parts used for gay sex are not complementary, he wrote. “When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and diseases may occur.”

[Wow. Is this breaking news -- that male and female anatomy are complementary?]

Holsinger wrote that “[a]natomically the vagina is designed to receive the penis” while the anus and rectum — which “contain no natural lubricating function” — are not. “The rectum is incapable of mechanical protection against abrasion and severe damage … can result if objects that are large, sharp or pointed are inserted into the rectum,” Holsinger wrote.

The cardiologist details many different diseases gay men can catch, and several sexual practices they may engage in, including “anal eroticism,” which can lead to injuries and even death. “From the perspective of pathology and pathophysiology, the varied sexual practices of homosexual men have resulted in a diverse and expanded concept of sexually transmitted disease and associated trauma?”

[Here Tapper distorts: the words "anal eroticism" are actually taken from a 1988 paper by Richard Giest titled "Sexually Related Trauma," in the journal, "Emergency Medicine Clinics in North America." The paper describes the "fist fornication" (fisting), which -- according to Holsinger, citing Geist -- "during the 1970s was practiced by approximately 5% of the male homosexual population." As you can see by reading HERE, the heinous act of "fisting" is still practiced today by some homosexual men (sadomasochists).]

In the context of the larger argument in his church as to whether homosexuality should be accepted, Holsinger presented a medical and scientific argument that anal intercourse was not natural.

“It is absolutely clear that anatomically and physiologically the alimentary and reproductive systems in humans are separate organ systems, i.e., the human does not have a cloaca,” he said, referring to the posterior orifice that serves as the one opening for genital, urinary and intestinal tracts in amphibians, birds and reptiles. The surgeon general nominee wrote that “even primitive cultures understand the nature of waste elimination, sexual intercourse and the birth of children. Indeed our own children appear to ‘intuitively’ understand these facts.”

A Political Agenda?
Professor Eli Coleman, Director of the Program in Human Sexuality at the University of Minnesota Medical School said that the paper seems to have a pre-1970s view of human sexuality. “I can’t imagine that any scientific journal would be able to publish this material because of its very narrow views of homosexuality,” he said.

[This comment sets up a straw man, in that Holsinger's paper was not written for a scientific journal. Of course, the average TV viewer has no inkling of what the 1991 paper is all about, except that it is now "controversial."]

In fact, if one of his students handed the paper in, Coleman would give it a failing grade, he said. “I find it rather outdated in terms of its scientific knowledge and also narrow in its view of homosexuality,” Coleman said. “It concerns me because I think our public policy really should be based upon best available science.”

[How silly: can we blame Holsinger for the fact that his paper, written 16 years ago, would now be considered "outdated"? C'mon, professor!]

“It’s a totally faulty paper. The man doesn’t know anything about human sexuality,” said June M. Reinisch, Ph.D., director emeritus of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender & Reproduction. “There’s clearly a political agenda in this paper. This is not a scientific paper.”

[Tapper brings in yet another left-leaning critic to bash Dr. Holsinger. The 1991 paper was written to buttress the case against changing the United Methodist Church's policies regarding homosexuality and "gay" relationships. It used facts and academic research about the risks of homosexual practices to do so.]

Paragraph by paragraph, Reinisch said Holsinger presents faulty arguments. Many homosexuals do not engage in the sexual act he criticizes; 40 percent of heterosexuals do. “It seems to me he’s arguing the only way reproduction happens is in a loving heterosexual environment which is of course not true,” Reinisch said, noting artificial methods, rape and one-night stands.

[Here, the media consumer has no inkling of which "paragraphs" on which Ms. Reinisch is commenting. Dr. Holsinger's 1991 paper talked only generally about the reproductive vs. the alimentary (digestive tract) systems, so her comments about rape and one-night stands seem out of place.]

Reinisch, who was director of the Kinsey Institute when Holsinger wrote this paper, said that if Holsinger “is going to come up with this position in 2007 I think I can clearly say that he is not qualified to be surgeon general.”

[Pretty sweeping conclusion from a biased read of a 16-year-old paper! This is a Washington smear-politics at its worst. Call or write your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 (www.congress.org) to support this good man who could become the latest victim of the Left's attack machine.]

Holsinger holds a doctorate in anatomy and physiology and an M.D. from Duke University. He spent much of his career working for the Veteran’s Health Administration. From 2003 to 2005 he was Kentucky’s secretary of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services.

What better gift for our military on Memorial Day Weekend: Disney-ABC has announced an early departure from The View for Rosie O’Donnell. Perhaps now this moronic daytime television program will return to obscurity and irrelevance, where it belongs.

By now, nearly everyone is aware of the blowout on Wednesday’s episode. Joy Behar (former high school teacher and alleged comedienne) opened with a list of complaints against President Bush which, in her view, merit impeachment and a vigorous beating with wet noodles. We’re talking serious offenses like “choking on a pretzel” and being incapable of pronouncing “nuclear.”

That last one has always annoyed me, too, almost as much as when I heard it from Jimmy Carter, who was actually supposed to be a “nucular” engineer (not just a Yale history grad with a Harvard MBA). Back then, my frustration was assuaged by working for Reagan in the 1980 election. Ronnie knew how to pronounce “nuclear” and he knew how to deal with radical Islamic fascists and communists, too. But I digress…

Joy suggested that Al Gore is just the man to lead us out of Iraq, which raised the issue of the Iraq War, which opened the door for Rosie (high school graduate) to confront Elisabeth Hasselbeck (Boston College alumnus). On May 17th, Rosie attacked Elisabeth for using the word “terrorists” and posed a question that offended many Americans (even liberals):

O’DONNELL: … 655,000* Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?
HASSELBECK: Who are the terrorists?
O’DONNELL: 655,000 Iraqis — I’m saying you have to look…
HASSELBECK: Wait, who are you calling terrorists now? Americans?
O’DONNELL: I’m saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?…
O’DONNELL: I believe there is government-sponsored terrorism by every nation in the world, including ours.

* Rosie’s casualty figure is preposterous, much like Joy’s list of President Bush’s capital offenses.

Shockingly, the media interpreted Rosie’s remarks as an indictment of our troops. Rosie still doesn’t know how they got that idea. (Hint: Elisabeth asked her three times “Who are the terrorists?” but Rosie never answered.)

Somehow Rosie was hurt and angry because she expected Elisabeth, as her “friend,” to defend her against “those crappy cable shows — the ones Elisabeth watches.” As her “friend”? Let’s review a sampling of the “friendly” remarks Rosie made to Elisabeth in the last ten months:

Sept , 2007 — “Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam…”
Feb 18, 2007 — “”You’re very young, and you’re very wrong.” And later in the conversation: “I know, but it’s the way that I’m able to be on this live broadcast and love and support you in spite of the fact that I disagree so abhorrently with most of the things you believe, so it is what I tell myself in order to not get into the RAGE I feel at at some of the IGNORANT comments, so that’s what I have to do!”
May 21, 2007 — “Are you not able to hold two concepts at once?”
May 23, 2007 — “You’re going to double-speak…” and later “…that was cowardly.”

Is that the way you talk to your friends?

At long last, Elisabeth had enough of the insults and finally stood up for herself: “Defend your own insinuations!…Defend your own thoughts!…”

Why would Rosie want to be defended by someone she characterizes as a nitwit? Why does she think she can verbally abuse a friend over and over, and still have one?

“Like most bullies, Rosie is clueless how to respond when she is challenged.”

After provoking and degrading Elisabeth for months, Rosie did what bullies always do when someone has the courage to fight back: She took her Barbies and went home to pout (while her chief writer, Janette Barber, being equally mature and professional, stayed behind to draw mustaches on all the photos of Elisabeth). And Rosie won’t be back because she doesn’t have a punching bag anymore.

Rosie O’Donnell was once a light-hearted and funny entertainer, but after years of living in sexual depravity (first with a man and now as a lesbian), she is consumed by rage. The emptiness and misery which result from wickedness are evident in her countenance. It is a very sad thing to watch a precious human being self-destruct. (And what is the impact on children of a “mother” so angry, so combative, constantly arguing and striving and attacking?)

The Bible says that those who persist in homosexuality are given over by God to a debased mind. Do you wonder how Rosie can possibly believe that our own president helped destroy the World Trade Center? Are you perplexed at her insistence that her own understanding of physics is superior to those “ignorant” engineers at Popular Mechanics? Answer: Because her mind is not healthy. And it won’t be as long as she lives in defiance of the Almighty.

But where I lose patience with Rosie and others like her, God does not. Peter says that our Father does not want anyone to perish, but for everyone to come to repentance. In her deep unhappiness, Rosie may yet humble herself and acknowledge God’s divine power and authority over her and repent. Rosie has a generous heart that could be used to glorify Christ — so let us pray that an epiphany is at hand.

But don’t stop there… Look around at your church, at your child’s school, in your neighborhood. Where you see a child missing a mom or a dad (whether through illegitimacy, divorce, or death), you have an opportunity — and an obligation — to fulfill James 1:27. Greet them with a smile and a hug and ask them what they’re up to, how school is going. Ask their parent if you could take them shopping for a new outfit or a pair of school shoes or help them with a school project — because that will accomplish two goals: It will help the single parent and it will begin to build a relationship with the child whereby you may become a powerful influence for righteousness.

Imagine how much comfort a compassionate Christian woman might have provided to Rosie O’Donnell during her adolescent and teen years. How sad that she was neglected when she needed love — the love she is still desperate for but will never find in lesbian sex. Every child has sinful inclinations; every child faces challenges as he/she matures. Kids need godly, trustworthy adults to care about them, guide them, and correct them from time to time. If you aren’t there when a vulnerable child is dealing with self-consciousness, confusion, sexuality, and temptation, homosexual activists and their “allies” at school will be glad to fill your shoes and drag an innocent child to hell.

The girls on “The View” are unanimous: Homosexuality is not only morally right but probably ought to be encouraged if we want to keep our military strong.OK, maybe mandating homosexuality in the military won’t fly just yet. For now, the ABC morning show’s talkers will have to be content fighting amongst themselves as to who is more outraged by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace, who told the Chicago Tribune that homosexuality, like adultery, is immoral.

The gals were in good media company. Not one of Tuesday’s morning or evening news shows on ABC, NBC or CBS featured a single person defending the general’s remarks. The tone was overtly hostile, with stories moving smartly through a laundry list of talking points found on homosexual activist groups’ websites. The Washington Post managed a March 13 trifecta: an editorial, “The Right to Serve,” an op-ed by Republican homosexuality booster and former Wyoming Sen. Alan K. Simpson, “Bigotry That Hurts Our Military,” and a news article by Ann Scott Tyson, “Sharp Drop in Gays Discharged From Military Tied to War Need.”

It’s not as if the American people are clamoring for the military to welcome open homosexuality. Despite some profoundly distorted polls like the recent Zogby survey of military personnel, a large segment of the American people believe, as Gen. Pace does, that homosexual behavior is immoral. According to the Cultural and Media Institute’s National Cultural Values Survey released on March 7, which polled 2,000 demographically representative Americans, 49 percent say flatly that homosexuality is “wrong.” Only 14 percent of Americans say homosexuality is “right.” The stampede to end the ban isn’t coming from the public, but from the media and some liberal politicians backed by the homosexual lobby.

On “The View,” the ladies opened the March 13 program by trashing the general, who wasn’t there to defend his honor.

Nor was anyone else inclined to do so, even designated “conservative” Elizabeth Hasselbeck. She openly wondered whether Pace harbors vices of his own that drove him to say what he did. This is a standard homosexual propaganda technique: Attribute dark motives to anyone who won’t salute the rainbow flag. You can look it up in their strategy manual, a book entitled “After the Ball.”

Rosie O’Donnell, a famous out lesbian, predictably came unglued. Over the past few years, she has defined herself primarily by her sexual behavior, and then claimed that people with moral qualms about homosexuality are bigots who are assailing her identity.

Here are portions of the five-minute discussion:

Joely Fisher: “We need to open General Pace’s closet and see what’s in there.”

Joy Behar: “Do you think people who are homophobic are gay closeted cases themselves?”

Fisher: “Or sexually repressed or uncomfortable with their own sexuality in any way?”

O’Donnell: “So if you are a gay person you are immoral. You are innately bad. You are less than, because you are gay. It’s like saying all lefties are witches.”

Hasselbeck: “He likened it to adultery, an adulterous person in the armed services would face some sort of punishment or some sort of slap on the wrist. …”

Fisher: “But it’s OK to kill people.”

Behar: “If you’re saying it’s immoral the way adultery is, then let gay people get married. Then it won’t be immoral.”

O’Donnell: “Can you be a straight person who is a horrible person, who is adulterous and has no morals?”

Fisher: “And have a leg up”

O’Donnell: “But it’s impossible for a gay person ever to be treated equal, which is the premise of this country, that all men and women are created equal, they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, all people, even the gay ones. (Bares her teeth, shouts) General Pace, wake up! It’s 2007. There’s a war on! Leave the gays alone!” (applause)

After Rosie’s outburst, Hasselbeck explained why everyone doesn’t just go ahead and cheerfully accept homosexuality as moral:

“What happens is there’s this group of, you know, religious believers, be it Christian or whoever, who believe certain sins are worse than others. They do believe homosexuality is a sin, because they are not guilty, guilty of it, then they say, ‘It’s not my sin so I will focus on that,’ then pretty much hide the fact that I’m guilty of some other things as well.”

Later, she opined that, “We should not judge one another. I feel that’s the root of Christianity. You shall not judge.”

Does that mean we’re not to judge adultery? Promiscuous sex? Polygamy? Prostitution?

Inquiring Viewers want to know.

Tonight (Thursday), Mar 15, 2007, the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NJGJA) hosts its 12th Annual New York Benefit. This isn’t the first time that FOX has given to the homosexual journalists’ group — whose national president made the spurious analogy that seeking both sides in media coverage on homosexuality is like going to “white supremacists” for a story about interracial marriage.

The following are sponsors for tonights event:

• FOX News is a “Silver Sponsor” with anchor Martha MacCallum (pictured below) as “special guest.”
• ABC News is the “Diamond Sponsor and Host” with anchor Brian Ross serving as master of ceremonies.
• CNN is a “Platinum Sponsor” with Soledad O’Brien of American Morning as “special guest.”
• NBC is a “Platinum Sponsor” with Rita Cosby of MSNBC, Natalie Morales and Meredith Viera of Today Show, and Carl Quintanilla of Squawkbox (CNBC) as “special guests.”
• CBS News is a “Gold Sponsor” with anchor Jason Bellini of LOGO, anchor Russ Mitchell, and Erin Moriarty of 48 Hours as “special guests.”
• The New York Times is a “Bronze Sponsor” with Robert Lipsyte as “special guest.”

Tickets to the VIP reception cost $500. With polls showing that about half the country supports Gen. Peter Pace’s belief that homosexual acts are immoral, we wonder how FOX and the dominant media can claim to be impartial in covering “gay”-related issues when they financially support pro-homosexual organizations like the NLGJA?

TAKE ACTION – Let FOX News know that you are not pleased with their contribution to tonight’s event.

The Washington Post claims in an editorial that there is an “uproar” over General Peter Pace expressing his view that homosexuality is immoral. This is another manufactured “scandal” designed to put a top official, in this case the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, in a bad light. This “uproar,” such as it is, has come from papers like the Post and homosexual rights activists. It is an effort at intimidation, pure and simple, and thought control.

At this point in the media-generated controversy, Pace has not apologized but has been forced to say he should not have emphasized his own personal views on the subject. Some stories are saying Pace has expressed “regret” or “mild regret.”

Whatever the outcome, and it is still possible that Pace could be forced to resign over this, the message has been sent: do not offend the powerful homosexual lobby, including the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA), which on Thursday, March 15, will be sponsoring a New York benefit hosted by ABC News reporter Brian Ross. The “special guests” will include Natalie Morales and Meredith Vieira of NBC News, Martha MacCallum of Fox News, Soledad O’Brien of CNN, and Robert Lipsyte of the New York Times. Corporate sponsors include ABC News, CNN, and NBC Universal.

As the NLGJA website puts it, the event is a “special evening for a great cause,” bringing together “a glittering collection of some of the brightest names in media, journalism and entertainment.”

Is it any surprise that the media have made the Pace comments on homosexuality into a national controversy, even scandal? The national media and the homosexual rights movement seem to be one and the same. But that’s a story that news consumers aren’t being told.

Leading the charge, the Post found Pace guilty of making “public expressions of intolerance.” The subheadline of the editorial was, “Gen. Peter Pace denounces gays and lesbians who are busy defending their country.” But he said nothing of the kind, and the paper knows it. The deceitful editorial is another attempt to intimidate people into not expressing opinions that contradict the politically correct views of the radical left. The Post, which runs announcements of homosexual “weddings,” will not be content until homosexuality is celebrated in the military and the schools as just another alternative lifestyle. Pedophilia, of course, can be defined by its apologists in that manner.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth points out that the Pace view is consistent with the writings of the Apostle Paul, who denounced homosexuality as an unrighteous behavior that would keep someone out of heaven. So if the Post finds what Pace said objectionable, it is also taking issue with the traditional Christian view of homosexuality. Of course, it’s easier for the Post to write an editorial denouncing Pace than attacking a disciple of Jesus Christ who doesn’t serve in the Bush Administration.

This controversy says more about the Post than it does about Pace. It shows that a major American newspaper has become a virtual house organ of the gay rights movement. And it shows that this paper will not hesitate to use its power and influence to try to intimidate those with different views. It is the Post, in fact, which is being intolerant.

I was among those who strongly criticized Ann Coulter for using “faggot,” a disparaging term about homosexuals. What Pace did, by contrast, was simply express his personal view, in an interview with the Chicago Tribune, that homosexual conduct is immoral. The Post editorial said in passing that Pace was “entitled to his opinions, of course,” but went on to complain about the impact of his words. What the paper is really saying is that he is entitled to his opinions but he should keep them to himself. Frankly, the paper wants him to shut up.

We are living in strange times when smoking is considered a serious danger to one’s health, and something which cannot be tolerated in most areas of public life, but a lifestyle linked to a raging epidemic of disease and death is regarded as a civil right that must not be criticized and even deserves to be celebrated.

The Post, in its editorial, carefully avoided the issue of what exactly male homosexuals do. Howard Phillips of the Conservative Caucus calls them “anal-sex practitioners.” That may sound shocking to some, but it is a fact nonetheless. The Post omitted this information in order to make the case that open and out-of-the-closet homosexuals should serve in the U.S. military. We don’t want to think about such things but we must as long as we have a media establishment, led by the Post, which wants public approval for engaging in such practices in the U.S. military and other areas of society.

When the Post devotes some of its precious and limited editorial space to denouncing Pace for his personal view of homosexuality, this is a big deal. You can be sure the paper isn’t doing this just to be fashionable. It seems obvious that one or more editorial writers on the paper are card-carrying members of the homosexual rights movement or sympathizers. In this connection, it is interesting to note that the paper has made financial contributions to the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association.

Also consider the fact that the Post ran a February 24 editorial about the “Death of a Gay Rights Pioneer” by the name of Barbara Gittings. I have been writing about the homosexual rights movement for over 20 years and I had never heard of her before. It turns out, according to the Post, that she is the “Founding Mother” of the homosexual rights movement, a lesbian who led the fight to bring more homosexual propaganda into the public libraries. As long as we are on the subject, Post readers are also entitled to know that the founding father of the gay rights movement was Harry Hay, a communist who supported pedophilia as just another “sexual orientation.” But don’t look for any investigations by Post Watergate reporter Bob Woodward into the sordid history of the homosexual rights movement.

The Post is one strange paper. On some matters, such as its treatment of the Joe Wilson/Scooter Libby affair, the Post can break through the liberal mold and offer straightforward and well-researched editorials. But on the issue of homosexual rights, the paper is strident to the point of sounding like the Washington (Gay) Blade, the local homosexual paper.

The Post has not yet called for Pace’s resignation. But that could come if this media-generated “uproar” continues. Those who believe in freedom of speech, traditional values, and fair and responsible journalism should stand solidly behind Pace.