As he did in justifying his support (as a "Christian") for homosexuality, President Obama twists the Bible and specifically the Golden Rule to justify his embrace of homosexual "marriage."

Contact: Peter LaBarbera: americansfortruth@gmail.com.

May 10, 2012

CHICAGO–Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) President Peter LaBarbera issued the following statement today on President Barack Obama announcing his support for homosexual “marriage”:

President Obama’s embrace of homosexual “marriage” (so-called) is surprising only in its timing. Most Americans do not realize that Obama was FOR homosexual “marriage” years ago as a State Senate candidate in Illinois, before switching to “Civil Unions.” Now this president, like a chameleon changing colors, returns full circle to advocating “marriage” between people of the same sex – as a public Christian, no less.

Obama’s embrace of homosexual “marriage” (an oxymoron) completes his sellout of the American people, and of God, on this critical issue that speaks to issues far deeper than politics.  Many will remember this 2008 presidential debate exchange between then-candidate Sen. Obama and Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren:

REV. RICK WARREN: Define marriage.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. (Applause.) Now, for me as a Christian, it’s also a sacred union. You know, God’s in the mix. (Applause.)

That solemn affirmation of real marriage helped Obama become president, but four years later it appears to have been a sham –an artful pose intended to convey piety and moderation to gullible Christians. As President, Obama has gone so far as to unconstitutionally refuse to defend the Defense of Marriage Act – passed overwhelmingly by a bipartisan Congress and signed into law by Democratic president Bill Clinton — to help his homosexual activist allies in their “marriage” quest.  Yet they demanded more.

Once again, as he did to justify his support of proud homosexuality (dismissing Romans 1), the president twists Scripture to rationalize his expedient rejection of biblical Truth. With unparalleled chutzpah, the same Obama who called marriage “sacred” now cites the Golden Rule to justify its absurd and revolutionary redefinition to include sexual perversion (homosexuality). It seems precious little is truly sacred to the Left, secular or religious. God cannot bless sin, and no true Christian would confirm others in a sinful lifestyle – one that merits eternal judgment (I Corinthians 6). The good news is that many men and women once trapped in homosexuality have found freedom through the same Christ whose words Obama distorts.

The “evolution” of Obama – and Vice President Joe Biden, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, and so many prominent Democrats (and libertarian Republicans) – toward accepting “same-sex marriage,” is really a story of the corruption of modern liberalism and, indeed, America’s slide into moral decadence. The chattering classes dwell obsessively on politics – and certainly Obama’s capitulation was driven by pressure from his well-funded “gay” activist base. But America’s precipitous moral decline – represented by the slow, and then rapid, embrace of evil (organized sin) by its leaders –tells a more important story: America is losing its goodness because we are leaving God behind.

Yesterday, Barack Obama used his bully pulpit to hasten America’s slide into oblivion (sexual immorality accompanies the decline of civilizations). The LGBT cheerleaders otherwise known as the media love him all the more for his trendy defection. But how Republicans and everyday Americans — especially Christians — respond to Obama’s moral treachery will say a great deal about whether there is any hope left for this nation that professes to be “under God” even as it brazenly rejects Him.

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

2-11-12, Patrick Wooden, Part Five

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

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

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

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

_______________________________________________

Contact AFTAH: americansfortruth@gmail.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

___________________________________________

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

_______________________________________________

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

Wants to import homosexuals with special asylum privileges

Posted: December 07, 2011
8:28 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND

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

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

The following is reprinted from PFOX’s (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays) website. Greg Quinlan was a presenter at both AFTAH Truth Academies:

I Am a Man

By Greg Quinlan

Why have gay activists instigated media attention over ex-gays and the husband of Presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann?

Apparently, Mr. Bachmann, who has a PhD in clinical psychology, operates several counseling centers which also offer services to homosexual clients seeking to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions.  But because even one ex-gay proves that homosexual behavior is not innate or immutable, the gay lobby’s fear of their former members results in false claims and attacks aimed at preventing homosexuals from exercising their right to self-determination. They cannot bear to have even one homosexual leave homosexuality, hence their outrage at Dr. Bachmann.

I know because I am ex-gay myself.  I suffer more harassment as a former homosexual than I ever did as an out and proud homosexual.

The ex-gay community includes thousands of former homosexuals like myself who benefited from counseling.  We did not choose our homosexual feelings, but we did exercise our right to seek help to change those feelings.  As a registered nurse, I saw hundreds of gay men die of AIDS before I finally left the gay lifestyle.

Contrary to the myths being generated by outraged homosexuals, counseling for unwanted same-sex attractions is not prohibited by any medical association.  Unhappy homosexuals are not children in need of parental permission and can freely choose their own therapeutic treatment just like anyone else.

The Bachmann incident demonstrates that as homosexuals gain more civil rights, heterosexuals are losing theirs.  Because gays are a wealthy and politically powerful minority, they claim access to media attention, political power and corporate influence that middle America does not have.

Dependent on the wealth of the gay community for his election and reelection campaigns, President Obama vigorously implements gay, bisexual and transgender policies at every level of the federal government, yet omits the only unpopular status of sexual orientation — that of ex-gay.  But to his credit, Obama refused to cave in to homosexuals when they demanded he remove ex-gay singer Donnie McClurkin from a campaign fundraiser.

President Obama needs to demonstrate that kind of courage once more, and support those who change their sexual orientation as much as he supports those who change their gender. But who will ask him? A jittery media fearful of gay reprisals remain silent, a further testament to homosexual influence and power.

While the media look the other way, the ex-gay community is being harassed and publicly denounced by unforgiving gay activists because of our unpopular sexual orientation.

Wayne Besen of the hate group Truth Wins Out, and other modern day Sauls, stalk and expose ‘out’ ex-gays in a negative light to ensure that they retreat back into the closet.  Lambda Legal supports the establishment of GLBT Centers at public universities but blocks any attempt at ex-gay equal access.  Corporate shareholder resolutions to include ex-gays in anti-discrimination policies are repeatedly defeated by the gay community.

The Human Rights Campaign demands same-sex marriage for gays while fighting ex-gay equality. One of their latest victories is to successfully bully the World Bank into denying funds to ex-gay charities while allowing gay organizations to participate.

Yet ex-gays are not dangerous or deluded as homosexual extremists charge.  We are the National Education Association’s Ex-Gay Educators Caucus.  We are Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, which successfully sued the District of Columbia government for refusing to recognize former homosexuals in its sexual orientation protections.  We are your doctors, teachers, ministers, family, and neighbors.

The American Psychological Association adheres to a code of ethics which calls on their members to respect a person’s right to self-determination.  Therefore the only question about the Dr. Bachmann news is this:  Should homosexuals have the right to determine heterosexuality?  That is, if a gay man decides he wants to live as a healthy heterosexual, as I decided, should homosexuals have the right to veto that decision?

The answer will determine if America is to be ruled by a politically powerful minority like the gay community, or if equality and justice for all will prevail.  As for me, I long to live in an America where my friends and I are not hounded by gay activists because I chose to change from gay to straight.

###

Greg Quinlan is President of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays and Executive Director of Equality and Justice For All.

http://pfox-exgays.blogspot.com/2011/07/michelle-bachman-and-ex-gays.html

Americans For Truth received an email today forwarded by a U.S. soldier serving overseas, who was sent an official notice containing the following statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton marking “International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia” (IDAHO; May 17th). Clinton’s statement had been forwarded by an “EEO  (Equal Employment Opportunity) Counselor,” who endorsed it enthusiastically.  The statement is published on the State Department website HERE. Accompanying it in the e-mail obtained by AFTAH is a notice by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) extolling IDAHO. The USAID notice is reprinted verbatim below.

In recent years, “transgender” activists and their allies have begun to popularize the use of the term “Transphobia” [See Urban Dictionary "definitions"]. Of  course, the word is tendentious and a derivation of its controversial LGBT cousin, “Homophobia” – the use of which continues to expand to cover opposition to homosexuality rather than irrational “fear” (phobia) of homosexuals. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

——————————————————————–
Press Statement

For Immediate Release

International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia
 
WASHINGTON, DC – In every part of the world, men and women are persecuted and attacked because of who they are or whom they love. Homophobia, transphobia and the brutal hostility associated with them are often rooted in a lack of understanding of what it actually means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT). So to combat this terrible scourge and break the cycle of fear and violence, we must work together to improve education and support those who stand up against laws that criminalize love and promote hate. As we mark the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia this May 17, let us resolve to redouble our efforts.
 
On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am proud to reaffirm our support for LGBT communities at home and abroad, and to call for an end to discrimination and mistreatment of LGBT persons wherever it occurs. Whether by supporting LGBT advocates marching in Belgrade, leading the effort at the United Nations to affirm the human rights of LGBT persons, or condemning a vile law under consideration in Uganda, we are committed to our friends and allies in every region of the world who are fighting for equality and justice. These are not Western concepts; these are universal human rights.
 
Despite these gains and hard work, there is more to do to turn the tide of inequality and discrimination against the LGBT community. If you are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, know that the United States stands with you and we are unwavering in our commitment to ending this cycle of hate.

_________________________________________________

The following notice from USAID (United States Agency for International Development) was included in the e-mail sent to the U.S. soldier serving abroad: 

USAID Notice
 
Subject: International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, May 17th
 
On May 17, 2011, USAID observes International Day Against Homophobiaand Transphobia (IDAHO) in support of lesbian, gay, bisexual, andtransgender (LGBT) communities in the U.S. and abroad fighting for legal and social equality, and to call for an end to discriminationand mistreatment of LGBT people worldwide.  IDAHO is celebrated worldwide on May 17 as the date in 1990 when the World Health Organization (WHO) removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders.  The theme this year is “As I Am,” which is a response to the daily homophobia and transphobia that seek to deny the individual worth of LGBT people.  IDAHO is an opportunity to reflect on the international LGBT community’s ongoing struggle for equal social treatment, civil protections, and rights.   Through its programs and policies, USAID encourages equality for all people, regardless of their sexual orientation and/or gender  identity/expression.  For example, across Asia, USAID helps ensure that LGBT people have equal access to HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment.  Additionally, in Washington, USAID has updated its “Policy on Diversity in the Workplace, Equal Employment Opportunity, and Non-Discrimination” to include protections on the basis of gender identity.  Despite these gains, there remains much work to remove inequality and discrimination against the LGBT community, and we encourage all USAID employees to consider how they, through their programs and daily actions, can speak out against and proactively undo homophobia and transphobia wherever and whenever it occurs.
 
USAID’s Office of Civil Rights and Diversity (OCRD) is committed to ensuring the equality and proper treatment of all its employees, and is proud to observe IDAHO in partnership with Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs Agencies (GLIFAA).  GLIFAA is the officially recognized employee resource group of LGBT and ally employees in U.S.foreign affairs agencies serving in the U.S. and abroad — it works to achieve full equality (in policy, treatment, benefits, etc.) for its members.  For further information and/or to join GLIFAA, please visit www.glifaa.org. Click here for further information about IDAHO, and to learn about related events in Washington and abroad.  Any questions concerning this notice may be directed to — Sheri Solomon, OCRD, (202) 712-1051.

Dear Readers, below is a YouTube video of President Obama’s Dec. 22, 2010 signing of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”  — ie., the ban on open homosexuality in the military. Republicans currently are struggling to respond to the rapid pro-homosexual changes in our military — which have their root in a campaign promise by Obama to his homosexual activist supporters. Take note at how everything in this White House celebration presumes that homosexuality be understood as an innocuous or positive identity, and the advancement of the “rights” of a minority (“gays and lesbians”). What is alien to this celebration of the “GLBT” Lobby’s greatest political victory to date is the conception of homosexuality as immoral (sinful), unnatural and/or destructive behavior.

The public’s embrace of this zeitgeist exchange of identity/group-civil rights for anti-social misbehavior is the single greatest achievement of the modern homosexual activist movement. However — just as the popularization of “pro-choice” rhetoric has no bearing on the ethics of killing innocent, unborn babies in the womb – this highly strategic, pro-”gay” cultural transformation has no bearing on the morality of homosexual practice. Nor does it negate the massive health risks and other pitfalls associated with homosexuality, including the emerging reality that homosexuality-based “rights’ destroy religious freedom (to oppose same-sex conduct). These matters obviously are of little concern to liberals, who are now so wedded to the “gay civil rights” paradigm that they see any attempt to view homosexuality through the (religious) lens of wrong-yet-changeable behavior as itself an act of “prejudice,” to quote our Commander-in-Chief.  — Peter LaBarbera, www. aftah.org

TAKE ACTION: Call your U.S. Congressman and U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121 and urge them to defend the Defense of Marriage Act that President Obama is working to undermine.

Our friends  at Liberty Counsel write:

Obama Betrays America By Refusing to Defend the Defense of Marriage Act

www.LC.org, Feb. 23, 2011

Today President Barack Obama instructed the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, and the Department of Justice to cease defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act. This is outrageous and unthinkable that the President would abandon the defense of marriage. He has betrayed the American people by his refusal to defend the federal law that affirms what many courts upheld as constitutional, namely, that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Read our News Release to learn more about the cases involved.

Regardless of President Obama’s own ideological agenda, as President, he and his Attorney General have a duty to defend lawfully passed legislation, especially when the essence of the law has been upheld by many courts. Thirty states have passed marriage amendments affirming marriage as one man and one woman.

President Obama has abandoned his role as President of the United States and transformed his office into the President of the Divided States. He has been the most divisive president in American history. He has today declared war on the American people and the fundamental values that are shared by most Americans. His radicalism resulted in the historical push-back in the 2010 elections.

We will not allow one President and one Attorney General to toss natural marriage aside.

President Obama talks with The Advocate, a magazine for homosexuals.

By Peter LaBarbera

It’s the Christmas holiday — the perfect time for President Obama and his veep, Joe Biden, to move closer toward the embrace of so-called “marriage” based on an unnatural sexual sin, right? Nothing like a little pandering to Homosexual-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transsexual activists to profane the Holy Season! (Read the president’s recent interview with the homosexual magazine The Advocate HERE, in which he says his “attitudes are evolving” on homosexual “marriage.” As for Biden, he calls same-sex “marriage” “inevitable”; see One News Now story featuring AFTAH below; listen to it by clicking on the audio button at the top right HERE.)

Evolving? Please. Did you know that in 1996 Obama explicitly came out FOR “same-sex marriage” in a candidate questionnaire? See my article HERE on Obama’s homosexual “marriage” doublespeak. For him, it’s not a matter of ”if” but “when” and “how” he gets there – and his homosexualist allies know it. But he’s slick: I still get mad thinking back to how Obama conned Rick Warren during the presidential debate with McCain — gaining bogus “pro-marriage” credentials with gullible Christians who had no clue as to how committed to homosexuality this mysterious man from Chicago really was.

Of course, from a Truth and moral formation perspective – Obama’s “evolving” views on homosexual “marriage” are worth about as much as Pee-Wee Herman’s. But Obama is our president, and he can and already is using his significant power to erode the meaning of marriage in our culture – promoting sexual sin in the guise of compassion and “rights” (and abortion-on-demand as a “reproductive right”). Make no mistake, this self-described “fierce” advocate of civil unions — fresh from his victory in homosexualizing the U.S. military — is sold out to the homosexual cause, including oxymoronic homosexual “marriage.” He will advance it any way he can — beginning with the evisceration of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act, signed into law by Bill Clinton).

Like so many phoney-religious politicians, despite professing Christianity, Obama is moved more by his homosexual friends and alliances — and the demands of Democratic Party politics – than by the Word of God, which is quite clear on the sinfulness of homosexual behavior. Sure, the Annointed One’s arrogance is mind-boggling, but no more so than a bunch of other liberal politicians who – with egos the size of Ukraine — are quite willing to put their political self-interest above obedience to God. (Jesus who…?) And once you’ve sold your soul on homosexuality in general, embracing “same-sex marriage” is just a matter of time. Remember Al Gore’s SSM “conversion”?

Well, here is what the real Anointed One, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, whose divinely orchestrated earthly birth we just celebrated, has to say about marriage:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” (Matthew 19:4-6)

Give Obama a few years and he’ll come out for full, legal ”same-sex marriage.” (Notice how liberals always “evolve” away from God’s timeless truth.) But first he will need to rationalize his disregard for the Bible – perhaps with some variation of his infamous dismissal of that “obscure line” in Romans 1 to make way for his political embrace of the Sin of Sodom.

For Obama and all smarter-than-God politicans, abandoning the dictates of their professed faith and manipulating those pesky ”social issues” (read: moral issues) is a daily exercise in camoflauging old-fashioned sinful rebellion as a newfound ”civil right.” (And who could possibly be against “civil rights”? “Why, that’s IMMORAL!!”) But Jesus Christ –no respecter of persons, or of declining nations – is the “same yesterday and today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8) and His eternal moral standard does not change with the political and cultural winds. God bless you. — Peter LaBarbera

American Family Association’s One News Now reports:

_____________________________

Activist: Obama a ‘lost man’ on issue of homosexuality

By Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow – 12/23/2010 1:20:00 PM
In light of President Obama’s recent comments on same-gender “marriage,” one family advocate describes the president as “a lost man…without a biblical conscience.”

In an interview with the homosexual publication The Advocate, Barack Obama said he is “wrestling” with the issue of marriage equality [AFTAH Editor's Note: read: homosexual "marriage"] and that his “attitudes are evolving.” The president made similar comments in a press conference Wednesday, just hours after he signed into law a repeal of the military’s ban on open homosexuality in the service.

Peter LaBarbera, who heads Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, believes that for all practical purposes, Obama is “completely sold out” for the homosexual agenda.

“President Obama has already said that homosexual relationships are as valid as normal heterosexual relationships — of course, he didn’t use the word ‘normal,’” he explains. “[But] I predict, give him a few years and he’ll be for so-called homosexual marriage. Obviously this is the most committed pro-homosexual president that the homosexual lobby has ever had.”

The pro-family activist points out the president’s anti-biblical stance on the controversial issue.

“What we have here is a president without a biblical conscience,” LaBarbera emphasizes. “He affirms homosexuality as if he’s God, but we know what God says and we have to stay true to that.

“President Obama is just sort of a lost man on this issue,” he continues. “He may be President of the United States, but that doesn’t give him the right to redefine timeless morality.”

LaBarbera adds that Obama might not make a commitment for homosexual “marriage” during his term as president, but likely will at some point.

“People view the military as the last bastion of morals and what is good. If we break that down here, what does it boil down to? What’s left?” – Service member comment made in Focus Group as part of the administration’s DoD’s report on repealing the ban on open homosexuality in the Armed Forces.

According to a Support Plan for implementing President Obama's plan to allow open homosexuals to serve in the military, a couple of male Marines in civilian clothes could kiss and display homo-erotic affection at the local mall without any repercussions. "Standards of conduct regarding public displays of affection (PDA) are orientation-neutral," according to the report (p. 82). What about on base? Obama's radical Repeal plan would degrade the moral authority of our Armed Forces and turn the Pentagon into the biggest bureaucracy working to mainstream homosexuality (sin) that the world has ever seen.

The U.S. Senate is hours, or perhaps a day, away from what I believe is the most important congressional vote on homosexuality ever taken in the USA: a bill that would Repeal the existing ban on open homosexuality in the military [Call your Senators: 202-224-3121]. If we lose and the Repeal goes forward, it will usher in a sea-change of pro-homosexual political correctness — not just on our Armed Forces, but on the rest of society, as a Brave, New, ‘Gay’-affirming Military will be held up as the new “civil rights” paradigm for the rest of America (God help us). The Homosexual Lobby knows what is at stake, which is why they have been pounding Capitol Hill for weeks on the Repeal. Unfortunately, not enough conservatives and people of faith understand the critical importance of this vote.

A handful of Republicans such as Sen. Scott Brown (who has flip-flopped on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ), Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and the two Maine Senators (Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins) may join with the Democrats in supporting the fast-track legislation passed by the House Wednesday (see vote Roll Call HERE). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid needs 60 votes to homosexualize the Armed Forces.

As sure as New Years Day follows Christmas, the Homosexual Lobby would seize upon this (giant) opening and push for more and more pro-homosexuality policy changes in the military — including same-sex partner benefits, “married” housing for homosexual Service members, sweeping pro-gay “diversity” propaganda for our troops, etc.  What a Christmas “gift” for our military men and women! (More like a huge, rainbow-striped lump of coal.) Please pray and do all you can to oppose this radical legislation! — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

________________________________________

Action Steps:

1) Call your Senators using the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 (www.senate.gov) and urge your U.S. Senators to vote against the Repeal of the military’s “gay” ban — and demand that a full and fair debate be held on this radical legistlation that would turn the Pentagon into the world’s largest de facto pro-”gay” advocacy agency. Here are some key Senators to call in this bill; use the Capitol Switchboard (202-114-3121; 202-225-3121) or even better: go to www.senate.gov for their contact info and call their local office numbers:

Republicans:

• Sen. Lisa Murkowski (AK):
• Sen. Scott Brown (MA):
• Sen. Mark Kirk (IL; still “undecided,” according to his aides):
• Sen. Richard Lugar (IN)
• Sen John Ensign (NV)
• Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME)
• Sen. Susan Collins (ME)
• Judd Gregg (NH)
• George Voinovich (OH)

Democrats:

• Joe Manchin (WV) (he was the only Democrat who voted with the Republicans to deny cloture in the last Senate Repeal vote)
• Bill Nelson (FL),
• Ben Nelson (NE),
• Jon Tester (MT),
• Evan Bayh (IN),
• James Webb (VA)
• Mark Warner (VA),
• Mark Pryor (AR)
• Blanche Lincoln (AR)
• Mary Landrieu (LA)

2) Pray that this Repeal bill would be stalled in the Senate. Contact your friends and urge them to pray as well. If Harry Reid calls the House bill and gets 60 votes, this battle is over — and then (as with Obama-care) Americans will learn the radical ramifications of this legislation!)

3) Pass this e-mail to your family members, friends, and contacts — especially those living in states with key states above, and urge them to take action!

_______________________________________

Background — Working Group Report makes case for NOT repealing the “gay” ban:

I finally read most of the Obama-/Def. Sec. Gates-commissioned Working Group DoD report on the DADT Repeal and – although biased and carefully written and “spun” to camouflage some of the extreme results of allowing open homosexuals in the military, it STILL contains plenty of information showing how damaging the Repeal would be to our military. Here are some findings of and problems with the DoD report:

• 23.7 % of surveyed Service members (38.1 % of Marines) said repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would cause them to “leave [the military] sooner than I planned” or “think about leaving sooner than I had planned”;
• 44.3% of combat veterans (59.4% of Marines) said that having an open homosexual in their immediate unit in a field environment or out at sea would “Negatively” or “Very Negatively” affect their “unit’s effectiveness at completing its mission”; other survey data shows significant opposition within the ranks to the idea of homosexuals serving openly;
• A major flaw of the Working Group report is the analogy it draws between Service members currently serving with men and women they know or suspect to be homosexuals (under DADT) — with being able to serve alongside “gays and lesbians” under a new regime in which homosexuality is out of the closet. Obviously, in the current situation, homosexual Service members are forced to be discrete. A new military culture tolerant of ”open and proud” homosexuality – including pro-homosexual “diversity” teachings, etc. — is simply not analogous to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”;
• The report punts on the question of military benefits for same-sex couples, but recognizes that this will be a future issue — and even notes that one of the big problems it will cause is that unmarried heterosexual soldiers will be upset if coupled “gay” soldiers get partner benefits while they are not allowed to get benefits for their hetero boyfriend or girlfriend. Thus, repealing the ban jars open a Pandora’s Box: surely gay activists will DEMAND partner benefits — using lawsuits if necessary — in the name of respect, equality, and “fairness”;
• The report discusses respecting Service members’ “dignity” but rules out separate shower facilities and barracks for homosexuals – saying that doing so would “stigmatize gay and lesbian Service members in a manner reminiscent of ‘separate but equal’ for blacks prior to the 1960s” (p. 12). In other words, the Armed Forces is more concerned about offending ’gay and lesbian” members’ sensitivities than defending the privacy rights and dignity of normal, hetero Service men and women;
• The above shows that in the name of paving the way for homosexuals’ alleged “civil rights,” the DoD is willing to abridge the civil rights of the normal majority of Service Members;
• The above is also just one example of the DoD’s unfortunate penchant for linking the laudable and noble civil rights achievement of racially integrating black soldiers into the Armed Forces with the crusade to allow open homosexuals — with their attendant sexual desires and behavior — into the military. Racism is bigotry, and wrong. Moral opposition to homosexuality (widely and historically regarded as sinful) — and common-sense privacy concerns based on the self-described sexual desires of homosexual men and lesbians – are natural and acceptable. Applying the DoD report’s logic, men should be able to shower with women as long as they recognize that they cannot ogle them or make sexual advances on them in the shower (see p. 13: “to fit in, co-exist, and conform to social norms, gay men have learned to avoid making heterosexuals feel uncomfortable or threatened in these situations”);
• The Working Group report admits that factoring in the sentiments it received in its review process — through large “informational exchange forums” held on bases, smaller focus groups, online confidential communications, etc. — “our sense is that the majority of views expressed were against the repeal of the current policy” (p. 49). Perhaps this helps explain why President Obama and Defense Sec. Gates did not task the Working Group with studying whether the troops wanted this pro-homosexual change, but rather how a Repeal would be implemented;
• There are some excellent comments from Service members opposing Repeal in the DoD report, including this by a woman: “I do not have to shower or sleep with men so I do not want to shower or sleep in the same room as a woman who is homosexual. I would feel uncomfortable” changing and sleeping as I would if it wa a man in the room. i should not have to accept this.” (p. 50);
• On DADT: “You don’t ask and you don’t tell, you come to work and do your job. It is not broke so don’t fix it.” (p. 52);
• On using the military to promote immorality: “People view the military as the last bastion of morals and what is good. If we break that down here, what does it boil down to? What’s left?” (p. 55)
• In defending the right of religious and moral-minded Service members (and chaplains) to voice their opposition to homosexuality, the DoD report authors seem oblivious to the escalating legal and cultural conflict in the civilian world between homosexual activists’ demanding same-sex “rights” – and the freedom of Christians and other moral critics to live out their opposition to that behavior. Surely this “values contest” will be transferred to the a post-Repeal military — as many homosexual activists will put their “right” to be accepted above the freedom of Service members to disagree with homosexuality. The report offers no coherent plan for how it will manage and balance that inherent conflict — and how it will avoid trampling over the rights of moral-minded Service-members in its zeal to enforce homosexual tolerance through (presumably mandatory) post-Repeal education and training programs.

If it is not proper for male TSA agents to frisk female travelers, why would the TSA allow homosexual men to "pat down" male travelers, or lesbians to "pat down" women?

News Release, November 16, 2010

Contact: Peter LaBarbera: 630-717-7631; americansfortruth@gmail.com

CHICAGO – Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) today questioned the propriety of “same-gender” TSA (Transportation Security Administration) “pat-downs” – if the TSA agents doing the “patting down” are homosexual, lesbian or bisexual. 

Homeland Security Sec. Janet Napolitano went out of her way yesterday to stress that the TSA pat-downs are “same-gender” – mostly to reassure women that men will not be groping them at airports in the name of safety.

“But what about homosexual TSA agents?” AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera responded. “Isn’t it just as inappropriate for a ‘gay’ male TSA agent to pat down male travelers as it is for a normal, heterosexual male TSA agent to pat down female travelers?

“The reality is, most traveling men would not want Barney Frank to pat them down at the airport security checkpoint,” LaBarbera said. “Neither would it be fair to assign Ellen DeGeneres to pat down female travelers. (In the same vein, the Army should no more force normal male soldiers to shower and bunk with homosexual male soldiers than it would force females soldiers to bunk and shower with their male counterparts.)”

The TSA, as a federal agency, is barred from discriminating on the basis of “sexual orientation,” thanks to a pro-homosexual Executive Order signed by President Clinton in 1998.

Said LaBarbera: “Obviously Napolitano wants to assure the public that sexual tension will be taken out of the equation. Hence, we must take seriously the self-identified desires of homosexuals. ‘Gay’ men define themselves as being sexually attracted to other men. Lesbians are sexually attracted to women. And bisexuals are attracted to both. Some observations:

• Perhaps some common-sense, healthy “discrimination” is in order: the TSA should put conditions on employment for self-acknowledged homosexuals – that they not be assigned to pat down travelers so as to avoid being put in sexually compromising situations;
• It would not be workable to assign, say, gay male TSA agents to pat down female travelers – as the latter – thinking the agents to be normal men – would protest that they are being patted down by males. Chaos would ensue;
• Does the TSA know which of its employees are homosexual, anyway, and how? If not, is it fair to travelers who may end up getting ‘groped’ by homosexual TSA agents who are secretly getting turned on through the process?
• Could the TSA be subjected to a sexual harassment lawsuit if the agent who engages in an overly aggressive “same-gender pat-down” – and gets sued – turns out to be homosexual?

LaBarbera said that even if it could be assumed that most TSA agents – regardless of their sexual proclivities – would act professionally, that is not the issue. Male TSA agents – no matter how “professional” their conduct – cannot frisk female travelers.

“To allow homosexual agents to conduct same-gender pat-downs is tantamount to a new form of discrimination that must be recognized and prevented,” he said.

__________________________________

Dear AFTAH Readers,

In an astonishing display of the same arrogance that led to the Democrats getting a “shellacking” at the polls Tuesday, President Barack Obama has renewed his call to repeal the military’s ban on homosexuality (the existing law is misnamed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”). Seemingly learning nothing from the election, Obama and his left-wing, homosexual activist allies are hoping to force the homosexualization of the military in a lame-duck Congress.

The nation’s leading homosexual pressure group, the Human Wrongs Rights Campaign, has pledged — following the GOP landslide — to “[Put] every ounce of strength into pressuring the Senate to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before the end of the year.” I am stunned at Obama’s “audacity” in catering to desires of HRC and other militant LGBT Lobby groups rather than the concerns of Middle America and desires of our fighting men and women during a time of war.

In a post-election press briefing, Obama falsely declared that the gays-in-the-military issue is non-partisan — despite the GOP’s unanimity in standing behind Sen. John McCain’s successful blockage of the recent repeal attempt in the Senate. Obama also alluded to the public’s alleged overwhelming approval for his stance (based on biased polling data that exaggerates the level of support for repealing the Armed Forces’ homosexuality ban). He conveniently ignored other polls [see HERE and HERE] – including one commissioned by Elaine Donnelly’s Center for Military Readiness that show that a majority of likely voters supports the current law, while 57 percent of military and those in military families also support the law. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth, www.aftah.org

_____________________________

For the best info on the crisis of Obama’s attept to homosexualize the military, go to the Center for Military Readiness’ website, www.cmrlink.org. Also see these articles from the AFTAH website:

• Thank You, John McCain! Republicans Block Repeal of Military’s Homosexual Exclusion Law
• Most Important Gay Vote ever: Reid, Democrats Go ‘Gaga’ for ‘Gays’ in the Military
• ‘Log Cabin Republicans’ Are Plaintiffs in Federal Judge’s Ruling Striking Down Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell as Unconstitutional
• Video: Top Gays-in-Military Activist Aubrey Sarvis Tells MSNBC that Serving in Army as Homosexual Was ‘Not a Big Deal’
• Donnelly: Gates’ New Gays-in-Military Policy Invites ‘Noncompliance’ with 1993 Law Against Homosexuals in Military
• Will Our Military Stay Moral? Judge Orders Lesbian Reinstated to Air Force
• VIDEO: Elaine Donnelly Testimony on Why ‘Gays in the Military’ and ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Are Bad Ideas
• Zogby Poll Scam Pushes Homosexuals in Military; Meehan Introduces Repeal Bill Today
• Open Homosexuals in the Military: Bad Idea Then, Bad Idea Now
• Knight: Conservative Media AWOL on Gays in Military Debate
• VIDEO: Log Cabin Republicans Mock Military, Corrupt Children at Chicago ‘Gay Pride’ Parade
  

Three elitist Iowa Supreme Court Justices down, four to go.

When the ACLU is whining about how “extremists” are taking over America, it is generally a sign that something good has happened in this nation. “We the People’s” repudiation of President Barack Obama’s and the Democrats’ left-wing agenda extended to a rejection of “homosexual marriage” and other extreme policies. Iowa voters tossed out three state Supreme Court justices who were part of the 7-0 decision to impose counterfeit “same-sex marriage” on the state in 2009. Good for them!

This is only the most important of many defeats for the Homosexual Lobby and its elitist liberal defenders on Election Day. We will try to alert you to some other significant pro-family victories on what was truly a pivotal day for the United States of America. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

As reported by WorldNetDaily.com, excerpted below:

Voters tell 3 Supreme Court justices: You’re fired!
Ouster follows imposition of same-sex ‘marriage’ on Iowans

——————————————————————————–
Posted: November 03, 2010
11:21 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh

Iowa voters have expressed their opposition to court-mandated same-sex “marriage” in their state by firing three of the state Supreme Court justices who created the new “right.”

Now those who campaigned for voters to reject Marsha Ternus, David Baker and Michael Streit say they are hoping that the message will reverberate across the country and other judges will begin reining in their activism.

“The people have spoken. Time for the elitist judges to understand there is a constitution and that government is owned by the people,” wrote Dennis S. in a forum at the Topix.com website.

Pastor Cary Gordon of Cornerstorne World Outreach in Sioux City, [Iowa] was one of the pastors who coordinated a letter to churches asking them to speak out against homosexual “marriage.”

He told WND that the letter reminded pastors of their moral obligation to cry out against evil and address arrogance and injustice in the courts.

Hundreds of pastors responded, he said.

“There were Catholics, Methodists, Wesleyans, Baptists; the list just goes on and on. It was humbling to see all those who wanted to do [their] duty,” he said.

The message from voters that resulted, the dismissal of the three justices up for retention votes, was “colossal,” he said.

“The message is very clear,” he said. “The left just doesn’t understand their error. The worst talking point they have had throughout this is ‘voting no is an abuse of the system.’”

Members of the Iowa Supreme Court who unanimously adopted same-sex ‘marriage’ for the state

But that’s dishonest, he asserted, because the retention vote is part of the system.

“Citizens don’t have to give a reason why they vote one way or another” he said. “The problem with the judges, we have remedied this morning.”

He said the judges who change the law, and in the case in Iowa step into the role of the executive branch of government by issuing orders to counties regarding marriage licenses, are “truly elistist,” he said.

He said he understands why progressive billionaire George Soros is traveling around giving millions of dollars to campaigns to remove voters from the process of picking and keeping judges.

“Euthanasia, the violation of property rights, the most egregious and barbaric ideas have come not from ‘we the people,’ but from elitist judges,” he said.

Judge Roy Moore, the former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court who runs the Foundation for Moral Law, told WND that the Iowa justices rejected the will of the people and the law they adopted.

Their removal, he said, “is a tremendously overwhelming message to the rest of the nation, that judges can be held accountable,” he said.

“This sends a message. Maybe judges won’t be as complacent and as radically activist if they realize people will rise up,” he said….

 [Continue reading at WND.com]

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

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

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

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

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

The homosexual activist group Log Cabin Republicans is listed as Plaintiff on the 86-page decision by District Court Judge Virginia Phillips striking down the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" rule against self-avowed homosexuals in the military as "unconstitutional." Several prominent Republican lawmakers led by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) are slated to speech at a Log Cabin event in Washington, D.C., Sept. 22nd.

Like we always say: homosexual activists first, Republicans second. What do you do when your Democratic Commander-in-Chief is ramming the pro–homosexual agenda down the military’s and the nation’s throat? Make the Republicans more pro-perversion — yeah, that’s the ticket!

Perhaps the GOP could get a leg up on the Democrats by pushing immediately for the admission of open transsexuals (in addition to homosexuals) into the Armed Forces – with military-covered “gender reassignment surgery” (aka sex-change operations) for gender-confused transgender soldiers as a recruitment incentive. Sen. Cornyn, I’m being facetious…. Read the activist judge’s ruling HERE. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

_________________________

Courtesy LifeSiteNews.com:

Federal Judge Deems Military ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Rule ‘Unconstitutional’

By Kathleen Gilbert, LifeSiteNews

RIVERSIDE, California, September 10, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A federal judge in California Thursday night ruled that the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy banning homosexuals from disclosing their sexual orientation while serving in the U.S. military is unconstitutional.

The ruling, which the judge vowed to follow up with a permanent injunction against the policy in two weeks, arrived less than three months before the results of a Pentagon study evaluating the possible detrimental effects of repealing the policy is due to be presented to Congress.

In an 86-page opinion, Judge Virginia A. Phillips claimed that the defendants, listed as the United States and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, have failed to prove that DADT “was necessary to significantly further the Government’s important interests in military readiness and unit cohesion.” The Log Cabin Republicans, a national homosexualist Republican group, was plaintiff in the case.

Pro-family leaders immediately condemned the ruling.

“It is hard to believe that a District Court level judge in California knows more about what impacts military readiness than the service chiefs who are all on the record saying the law on homosexuality in the military should not be changed,” said Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, a Marine veteran, in a statement late Thursday. “This is a decision for Congress that should be based upon the input of the men and women who serve and those who lead them.”

Phillips argued that the ban violates homosexuals’ First Amendment right to free speech because it disallows them from discussing their sexuality.

“Heterosexual members are free to state their sexual orientation, ‘or words to that effect,’ while gay and lesbian members of the military are not. Thus, on its face, the Act discriminates based on the content of the speech being regulated,” she wrote.

While noting that courts traditionally “apply a more deferential level of review of military restrictions on speech,” Phillips said that DADT fails to win the special protection because it “encompasses a vast range of speech, far greater than necessary to protect the Government’s substantial interests,” as it restricts off-duty socializing and other casual speech.

Phillips also argued that DADT’s restrictions “actually serve to impede military readiness and unit cohesion” by discouraging military employees from reporting anti-homosexual harassment.

The suit was first launched in 2004, but stalled due to the health problems and retirement of the first judge assigned to handle the case, the plaintiff’s attorney, Dan Woods, told the Associated Press.

Defense Department attorneys did not summon any witnesses to defend the policy, presenting only DADT’s legislative history as a defense, and arguing that the debate was a political issue that should be left to Congress. 

The House of Representatives passed a repeal of the ban in May that would go into effect if Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, confirm that the repeal is sensible in light of the Pentagon report.

The judicial confirmation process has become a spectacle almost as comical as one of Al Franken’s (D-MN) jokes. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan was not grilled on whether she believes Americans have a First Amendment right to oppose homosexuality — i.e., whether their religious and moral liberties are overridden by “sexual orientation” laws.

“Kagan did not deny that her application of Harvard’s ['sexual orientation' nondiscrimination] policy would have excluded the Catholic Church.” –CNSNews.com, reporting on Kagan’s confirmation hearing

By Peter LaBarbera

Solicitor General Elena Kagan has been confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee by a 13-6 vote — after hypocritically dodging and weaving her way through the farce that now masquerades as the judicial confirmation process. Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC) was the lone Republican to vote for her — despite the fact that South Carolina is conservative while Kagan is the ideological cousin of our elitist, far-left president. (Click HERE for the MassResistance report on Kagan’s pro-homosexual record at Harvard.)

Kagan’s future now rests with the Democrat-dominated Senate — where most pundits (betting on listless GOP opposition) expect her to win confirmation; the vote is expected to come in early August.

Americans now face the prospect of a radically pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality social Leftist-for-Life sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court, potentially  for 30 or more years. In just 105 days, on Election Day (Nov. 2), U.S. citizens will be able to cripple Barack Obama’s power — a day anticipated by millions of citizens outraged over his arrogant and reckless presidency. In two more years, Obama could be voted out of office a la Jimmy Carter.

Not so with Kagan. Unless Republicans summon up the guts to actually block her via filibuster (don’t bet on it), she likely will soon become Justice Kagan until she retires at an old age. There, if her past is any indication, one day she will vote to create a new “fundamental right” of “same-sex marriage” out of an “evolving” Constitution –  all the while protecting that old make-believe “constitutional right,” sacrosanct to liberals, of abortion-on-demand. (See this Omaha World-Herald story on Kagan’s manipulation of  expert testimony in the Clinton administration to fight legislative attempts to ban the gruesome practice of partial-birth abortion.)

And why not? The same Supreme Court that upheld anti-sodomy laws as constitutional in Bowers v. Hardwick in 1986 struck them down as unconstitutional just 17 years later in Lawrence v. Texas. Will the same fate befall laws and state amendments banning “same-sex marriage”? Could a Justice Kagan be in the minority in a Court decision that rejects homosexual “marriage” (in its current conservative-vs.-liberal composition) — and then be in a majority that later overturns that decision, as happened with homosexual sodomy laws?

There hasn’t been ”rule of law” in America for decades, at least as it was understood by our Founding Fathers, and they knew a thing or two. The best evidence of that — and, indeed, of the folly of the U.S. legal system –  is our national difficulty in banning what is essentially legalized infanticide (partial-birth abortion; see description of this killing procedure HERE). How appropriate that Kagan herself played a central role in that — essentially the legal preservation of infant murder. (Perhaps she will find her ideological soulmate in current Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who strayed off the “pro-choice” talking points in a racist interview comment about Roe v. Wade:  ”I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”)

Rule of Law?

Without a foundation in transcendent moral truth and biblically-based (Judeo-Christian) justice, “constitutional law” becomes whatever liberals (or libertarians) interpret it to be, according to the whims of the age and as long as they can muster a one-vote majority. Remember the Boy Scouts of America — who came within a single vote of being forced to allow homosexuals as Scoutmasters despite the Scouts’ “morally straight” oath? These are the sorts of cases Kagan could be deciding for decades — subjectively applying her liberal “empathy” standard per Obama’s mandate.

(Whenever I hear a liberal like Obama talk about “empathy,” I wonder where it disappeared to regarding the protection of  the unborn – who are slaughtered in the womb in the name of adult “choice” because it would be inconvenient for them to be born. Never allow yourself to be intimidated by liberals pontificating on ”compassion” — they generally show greater “empathy” for the lives of death-row inmates guilty of committing heinous crimes than unwanted innocent babies in the womb. On the homosexuality issue, liberals are quite willing to encourage homosexual sex, which leads to “gay” men dying young, so great is their compassion.)

Solicitor General Elena Kagan

Given her long record of social radicalism — including harassing the U.S. military as Harvard dean because the latter would not allow homosexuals to serve — it’s not too difficult to predict how a Justice Kagan would behave on the Court. As Sen. Grassley states below, Kagan even wants to incorporate “international law” into America’s jurisprudence — and we know the result of ”sexual orientation” laws in countries like Britain and Canada. Both nations are becoming pro-homosexuality police states — arresting Christians for preaching publicly against sexual sin — even merely for expressing “anti-gay” ideas. Will America follow those laws? Will we honor and respect the European Union’s legal precedents? (See this European Parliament press release on “transgender” rights.)

The following is Sen. Charles Grassley’s (R-IA) statement of opposition to Kagan, followed by an article reprinted from CNSNews.com. The latter item illustrates the perils of pro-homosexuality “nondiscrimination” law. We wish Senators had demanded more answers from Elena Kagan on the “zero-sum” game between religious and First Amendment liberties and “gay rights” — because if she is confirmed she could become a leader on the court of Justices willing to impose their version of morality on Christians and others who refuse to lend legitimacy to homosexual practice.

Lastly, why is that Republicans so often fail to pull out all the stops in opposing a dangerous left-wing ideologue like Kagan. As Randy Thomasson writes HERE, the GOP could have upped the ante and refused to vote out Kagan — using a little-known provision that requires at least one minority member vote to approve a nominee out of committee after a member moves to block the vote. Maybe it would have only stalled the nomination further — but that’s what the Left would try to do were this a Republican-appointed nominee with a history of right-wing activism at a major university!

The Republican Party could do the nation a big favor by using the Kagan nomination to educate the nation on Obama’s extremist policies and goals. That way, even if she wins confirmation, they would undermine Obama’s potential to do further damage. But as is typical in these situations, the Democrats play hardball while the Republicans play wiffle ball. And unless they grow a backbone and quick, they’re about to strike out again by not doing everything possible to stop Kagan’s undeserved assent to the highest court in the land. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

____________________________________________

Sen. Grassley’s Opposition Statement on Kagan:

Senator Chuck Grassley released the following statement regarding his vote on Elena Kagan to be an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court:

“Since the nomination hearing for Solicitor General Kagan ended, I have spent time reviewing the hearing record. Thorough consideration has led me to conclude that I cannot vote for Solicitor General Kagan to be the next Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court.

“In her hearing testimony, Solicitor General Kagan failed to answer directly many of the questions posed to her.  This was extremely disappointing, especially since she previously took the position that Supreme Court nominees should be forthcoming in their answers on substantive issues.  Because she has no previous judicial experience, candid answers were essential for us to ascertain whether she has the appropriate judicial philosophy.

“Solicitor General Kagan’s record shows that she allows her politics and personal views to steer her legal thinking and takes an outcome-based approach when analyzing cases. She also has praised jurists who endorse an activist judicial philosophy. At the hearing, she declined to fully commit to upholding the constitution when it came to the Second Amendment. She appeared reluctant to recognize any constitutional limits on federal power, and also indicated that she would use international law for ‘good ideas’ when making decisions on the bench.

“Solicitor General Kagan is an accomplished political lawyer, but my vote must be based on the nominee’s ability to be an impartial jurist who would exercise judicial restraint and strictly adhere to the Constitution. Based on the record and the nomination hearing, I am not convinced that Solicitor General Kagan will be able to shed her deeply held personal ideological beliefs, political views and experiences, and check those biases at the door of the Supreme Court. Therefore, I must vote against her nomination.”

____________________________________________

CNSNews story:

Kagan Dodges Question On Whether Catholic Recruiters Would Be Banned from Harvard
Friday, July 02, 2010
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/68904

(CNSNews.com) – Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, who banned military recruiters from Harvard Law School’s career services office when she was dean of the school, declined to say whether she would have also banned the Catholic Church from recruiting on campus….
While testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, Kagan was questioned several times about her decision to ban the U.S. military from Harvard Law School’s Office of Career Services. Kagan maintained that she was merely applying the school’s non-discrimination policy and was not targeting the U.S. military recruiters.

While at Harvard, Kagan prohibited the U.S. military from using school resources because she claimed the military’s ban against open homosexuals – the “don’t ask, don’t tell policy” — violated the school’s policy. The policy says that prospective employers who would recruit on campus cannot discriminate based upon sexual orientation, among other criteria.

On Wednesday,  Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Kagan whether she would have applied the same policy to the Catholic Church, if it were looking to recruit and hire lawyers on Harvard’s campus.

The Catholic Church does not allow women to become priests, Graham noted. Catholic teaching, incidentally, also says that homosexuality is a moral disorder and the practice thereof cannot be condoned.

Kagan did not deny that her application of Harvard’s policy would have excluded the Catholic Church. The exchange between Sen. Graham and Kagan occurred as follows:

Sen. Graham: “Would it [the Harvard policy] apply to the Catholic Church, if they wanted to come and recruit lawyers from the law school because they don’t have women priests?”

Kagan: “Well, the way we enforced this policy is if an employer comes, we give the employer a form, and the form basically says, ‘I comply with the following policy’ that says, ‘I will not discriminate on the basis of.’ And then it says something like race and creed and gender and sexual orientation and actually veterans’ status as well. And if the employer signs the form, the employer can get the services of the Office of Career Services. And if not, not [get them].”

The Office of Career Services is the office that coordinates between students and prospective employers, and was the office from which Kagan banned the U.S. military and its recruiters.

Amy Contrada of MassResistance has exposed the radical pro-homosexual agenda of Elena Kagan (shown above) as Dean of Harvard Law School. Kagan is President Obama's second nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Here is AFTAH’s July 3, 2010 interview with Amy Contrada, Research Director for MassResistance and main author of the MR report, “How Elena Kagan Helped ‘Queer’ Harvard Law School.” Contrada — who has degrees from Tufts and Brown Universities and who once worked as an administrator at Harvard — writes for the MassResistance blog. Working with MR founder Brian Camenker (see AFTAH Camenker interviews Part One HERE and Part Two HERE), Contrada has written extensively on the “gay” activist movement in Boston and has authored an extensive report on radical transsexual rights bill under consideration in Massachusetts.  Both Amy and Brian have joined the faculty of the ongoing Americans For Truth Academy.

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

7-3-10, Amy Contrada, All

For the last few weeks I’ve been working with Mass Resistance’s Amy Contrada, who has pulled together a wealth of information about Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s time at Harvard University, where she served as Dean of the Law School. Many will be shocked at just how extreme Harvard has become — and the radical sexual/gender policies advanced by Kagan. Kudos to Contrada and our friends at Mass Resistance for doing the reporting that most in the liberal media refuse to do (because too many agree with Kagan’s left-wing social agenda). And thanks to Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt of the Pray in Jesus Name Project for supporting this work. Please read the full report, which ends with questions that members of the Senate Judiciary Committee should be asking Kagan.

TAKE ACTION: Fax and e-mail the Kagan report to Judiciary Committee members and request that they question Kagan on her full record at Harvard, which is way out of touch with the vast majority of Americans. Click on the names of the individual Committee members HERE and fax to their MULTIPLE offices (D.C. and local); request that the Senator ask Kagan the questions at the end of the report (reprinted below). Do the same to your own two U.S. Senators. (Congress switchboard: 202-224-3121.) – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Read our Mass Resistance report, “How Elena Kagan Helped “Queer” Harvard Law School (Will she now help “queer” the US Supreme Court’s decisions?)”

Read our Mass Resistance report, “How Elena Kagan Helped “Queer” Harvard Law School (Will she now help “queer” the US Supreme Court’s decisions?)”