Pastor Paul Blair of Reclaim Oklahoma for Christ will be among those preaching against the new federal "hate crimes" law and also against organized homosexuality in a "pray-in" in front of the Human Rights Campaign's DC headquarters. HRC is a homosexual lobby group that seeks to persuade Americans that the Bible does not condemn homosexual practice -- which clearly it does.

Folks, it’s about time that the aberrant-sex activists at Human Rights Campaign (the world’s leading homosexual lobby organization) be on the receiving end of some good, old-fashioned biblical preaching — rather than “preaching” to the rest of us with their false, distorted, pro-homosexuality “gospel.” (HRC President Joe Solmonese cynically describes church sermons against homosexuality as “preaching hatred.”) Click HERE for a taste of HRC’s revisionist propaganda that turns the Bible on its head: e.g., did you know that most of the the Bible verses that condemn homosexual acts, such as Genesis 19 & 19,  actually affirm GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) people?! (Strange how the Bible’s hidden pro-homosexual-relationships message escaped every orthodox expositor for centuries but was finally discovered by those with a vested interest in … legitimizing their unnatural sex- and gender-based “identities.”) — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

______________________________

Pastors Will Engage in Civil Disobedience to Protest Inclusion of ‘Sexual Orientation’ in Hate Crimes Law

WASHINGTON, Nov. 12 /Christian Newswire/ — On Monday, November 16 at 1:30 PM, the Coalition for Faith and Freedom, an ad hoc group of concerned clergy, will rally in front of the Justice Department in Washington, D.C. to test the limits of the expanded federal hate crimes law.

On October 28, President Barack Obama signed into law a measure extending the federal hate crimes statute to include so-called sexual orientation. The ministers believe this will criminalize all criticism of homosexual behavior, including that contained in the Bible.

To test this belief and protest a clear violation of First Amendment freedom of speech and religion, various clergy will preach short sermons and read passages from the Bible regarding homosexual behavior. Like Dr. Martin Luther King and the Sixties Civil Rights movement, they will engage in civil disobedience to protest injustice.

Those participating in the pray-in will include Vision America Action President Dr. Rick Scarborough, Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, Bishop E.W. Jackson of STAND America, Brian Camenker of Mass Resistance (a group which has fought gay marriage in the Bay State), Paul Blair and Steve Kern of Reclaim Oklahoma, Pat Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition, Brad Cranston of Iowa Baptists for Biblical Values, and Jim Garlow, a leader of the Prop 8 battle in California, which overturned the judicial imposition of gay marriage.

Legal challenges to the unconstitutional law may also be announced at that time. Mat Staver, Esq., founder and president of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty Law School, has been retained as their counsel and will be present at a press conference preceding the event.

Pastor Paul Blair, founder of Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ, summed up the sentiments of participants, when he observed: “Pastors have preached the Bible in America for more than 400 years, pointing the people to Jesus Christ and standing against sin. If preaching the Bible is now against the law, then let us be arrested. If not, may every pastor in America know that he can stand strong and proclaim Biblical Truth without fear of persecution or prosecution.”

For more information or to schedule background interviews, contact Misty Allmond at 866-522-5582 or visionamerica1@yahoo.com or Dr. Gary Cass at 866-508-2232 or drgarycass@christianadc.org.

SPECIAL STUDENT/PASTOR RATE:  Sponsor a student or a pastor to go to the AFTAH banquet for half the usual ticket price: just $25/person. Young people swimming in the pop culture’s pro-”gay” swamp and our spiritual leaders need to hear Matt’s inspiring message!  Please designate their school or church affiliation.  Call 910-308-7619 for more info. Sign up at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/.

Please save the evening of Saturday, October 24 to attend Americans For Truth’s banquet. Our featured speaker is Matt Barber, culture warrior for Liberty Counsel. Matt is quite a guy, to say the least. He’s gone from being a professional heavyweight boxer, to being fired by Allstate Insurance Company in 2005 because he wrote an online article — on his own time — critical of organized homosexuality, to his current position as one of America’s leading defenders of natural marriage and family. AFTAH got rave reviews for its last banquet; you won’t want to miss this one! The event will be held outside Chicago, at the Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL. Tickets are $50 per person. You can prepay online by clicking the “Online Banquet Signup” link at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/, or mail your check (designate: “banquet”) to: Americans For Truth, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.  Write us at americansfortruth@comcast.net, or call 910-308-7619 for additional information. Please spread the word and we hope to see you there on Oct. 24th!

Note: you can read some of Matt’s columns by plugging “Matt Barber” in the AFTAH “Search” button on the upper right corner of this website. We suggest you start with this important piece: “Matt Barber Answers Charge that Christians Focus Too Much on Homosexuality.” Matt’s will be signing copies of his new book, “The Right Hook: From the Ring to the Culture War,” at the banquet. Here’s what some top conservative leaders are saying about the book:

 “Our country is at a crossroads. Now, more than ever, we need strong voices to stem the tide of liberalism that is washing away America’s Judeo-Christian heritage. Matt Barber is one of those voices…” – Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee

“… Matt Barber is fighting back. The Right Hook is a must read for anyone who seeks to preserve America’s Godly heritage.” – Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich

“We are thankful that God picked Matt Barber out of the boxing ring and placed him in the national ring to go head to head with the adversaries of our country.” – Tim and Beverly LaHaye

“Matt Barber needs to be heard by every American … the kind of leader people should follow.” – Congressman Tom Delay

______________________________________________

Help AFTAH Stand for Truth against the “Gay” Lies!

Help us fight the well-funded, powerful Homosexual Lobby with your tax-deductible donation at http://americansfortruth.com/donate/.  You can mail your gift to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.  Thank you! — www.aftah.org

P.S.  We understand that the Christian-bashing, Marxist radicals over at Gay Liberation Network will be protesting IFI’s banquet. Now we know IFI must be doing something right.

“Activist judges in Iowa proved once again today how right the American Family Association of Michigan was to call for a preemptive Marriage Protection Amendment constitutionally securing the definition of one-man, one-woman marriage in our state, and how right the people of Michigan were to overwhelmingly approve it. … Homosexual activists will of course now parade counterfeit ‘marriages’ through the streets of Des Moines for a while, as they did in California, but eventually the people of Iowa will have a chance to vote on the issue, and the result will be the same there as in Michigan and 29 other states.”

Note in the Michigan Messenger article that Illinois is viewed as a likely state for a court challenge like Iowa that produced the “gay marriage” decision:

—————————

MICHIGAN MESSENGER
Lansing, Michigan
April 3, 2009

Michigan gay rights advocates praise Iowa’s same-sex marriage court ruling

by Todd A. Heywood

The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday morning struck down a state law restricting marriage to one man and one woman, and many Michigan residents are hailing the ruling that makes the Hawkeye State the first in the Midwest to OK same-sex marriage. However, the case will have little direct impact on Michigan.

“This is a great opinion,” said Jay Kaplan, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan’s Gay Lesbian Project. “This was a unanimous decision from Iowa’s Supreme Court and the first time we have a favorable opinion in the Midwest.”

“While the ruling itself is significant, the reasoning behind the unanimous decision is insightful, fair, and thorough,” said Julie Nemecek, co-director of Michigan Equality, a Lansing-based LBGT rights organization.

“It’s a different scenario there,” Kaplan said. “Iowa doesn’t have a constitutional amendment like we do. Its civil rights laws cover LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] people, and the make-up of its Supreme Court is different than what we have here. We’d have to repeal our constitutional amendment, replace several justices on the Michigan Supreme Court before we’d be able to see a decision like this here.”

Michigan voters passed a constitutional amendment in 2004 that banned gay marriage and other same-sex unions.

Still, Kaplan said, other states can look to Iowa’s ruling. “I think it sets a good template for states that are similarly situated to Iowa (in terms of laws, courts, etc.), and we may see more developments in marriage equality in the Midwest (possibly a successful challenge in Illinois in the future) — so that the successes are not just limited to the coasts.”

As gay rights groups across the country hail the ruling, opponents are not as happy.

Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan, opposed the ruling.
“Activist judges in Iowa proved once again today how right the American Family Association of Michigan was to call for a preemptive Marriage Protection Amendment constitutionally securing the definition of one-man, one-woman marriage in our state, and how right the people of Michigan were to overwhelmingly approve it,” he said. “Homosexual activists will of course now parade counterfeit ‘marriages’ through the streets of Des Moines for a while, as they did in California, but eventually the people of Iowa will have a chance to vote on the issue, and the result will be the same there as in Michigan and 29 other states.”

According to Lynda Waddington over at Michigan Messenger’s sibling site, The Iowa Independent, state law there does not have any residency requirements for marriage. This means same-sex couples could begin going to the Hawkeye State to get married, as was seen last year when California legalized same-sex marriage.

The Iowa Supreme Court judges are appointed by the governor, approved by the state Senate, then serve one year. At the end of the year they face a judicial retention election.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Utah Senate President Michael Waddoups and other GOP Utah Senate leaders and urge them to reinstate Utah St. Sen Chris Buttars (right) and NOT to punish him for speaking his mind against the aggressive and often hateful homosexual activist movement. Use the following contact information: e-mail: waddoups@utahsenate.org (other GOP State Senate leader e-mails HERE); Waddoups’ senate office: (801) 538-1407 or Utah Senate switchboard: 801-538-1035. Support Buttars at dcbuttars@utahsenate.org.

___________________________

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, I don’t know which aspect of this story is more preposterous: the notion of anti-Christian, homosexual lobby groups like Human Rights Campaign (HRC) — with their long history of demonizing people of faith as hateful bigots — setting themselves up as arbiters of responsible speech; OR … the specter of Republican Party leaders bending to pro-Democratic HRC’s pressure tactics.

My good friend Matt Barber (a Board Member of AFTAH) is correct below: if the Republican Party’s leaders think they are going to succeed in the long run by caving in to the Left’s version of “tolerance,” then we’re looking ahead at decades of Democrat Party rule in these United States. You simply cannot appease the homosexual activist movement, and groups like HRC are now engaged in a campaign of intimidation against pro-family lawmakers nationwide. Their unsubtle campaign attempts to classify any discussion of organized homosexual activism as a “threat” as beyond-the-pale hate speech leading to violence. More ominously, savvy homosexual moneymen like Tim Gill are targeting pro-family legislators for defeat using out-of-state “gay” PAC bundling, and it’s working [see this 2007 NPR story, "Wealthy Gay Donors a New Force in Politics," featuring Americans For Truth].

Chris Buttars is hardly alone: remember Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern, who was trashed by hateful homosexuals across the country for a speech she gave identifying the “Gay” Lobby as a serious threat to our nation? (Kern easily won reelection last year despite the hate campaign.) There have been other pro-family lawmakers who have been targeted in what is becoming a new “gay” direct-action political tactic of Intimidate, Demonize and Isolate Politically. (Take note of how the Left tried to erroneously paint Buttars as a racist; here’s a link with Buttars’ response.)

We understand that Sen. Chris Buttars is somewhat of a curmudgeon who comes from a different generation of Americans less apt to use politically-correct nuances and obey the speech codes set up by hypocrites on the Homosexual Left (who are among, of course, the most intolerant activists in the nation). But for Waddoups and the Utah State Senate GOP leadership to buckle to a group like HRC (see their pressure-letter against Buttars HERE) is unconscionable and a good example of why so many cynical conservatives call the GOP the “stupid party.”

The Republicans need to follow the example of their new chairman, Michael Steele, and get a backbone, and St. Sen. Chris Buttars should be reinstated to his post on the Judiciary Committee ASAP.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Utah Senate President Michael Waddoups and other GOP Utah Senate leaders and urge them to reinstate Utah St. Sen Chris Buttars and NOT to punish him for speaking his mind against the aggressive and often hateful homosexual activist movement. Use the following contact information: e-mail: waddoups@utahsenate.org (other GOP State Senate leader e-mails HERE); Waddoups’ senate office: (801) 538-1407 or Utah Senate switchboard: 801-538-1035. Support Buttars at dcbuttars@utahsenate.org. 

________________________________

Statement by Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs at Liberty Counsel (and Board Member of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality):

Contact: jmattbarber@comcast.net; February 24, 2009

Homosexual Activists Target Veteran Utah Legislator

Lynchburg, VA – During recent comments to a documentary film maker, Utah State Senator Chris Buttars observed that – as every major world religion and thousands of years of history have held – the homosexual lifestyle is immoral. Buttars further opined that militant homosexual activism poses a grave threat to American culture. Tens of millions of Americans and the majority of Utahns happen to agree.

Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Alliance Action and Liberty Counsel*, released the following statement today in response to news that Utah Senate President Michael Waddoups has caved to pressure by an anti-Christian homosexual hate group (the “Human Rights Campaign”) and has taken punitive action against Buttars by removing him from his post as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“If you need a prime example of why the Republican Party is presently spiraling into the abyss of political irrelevancy, you need look no further than to Utah,” said Barber. “The conservative majority in both Utah and across the country is starved for leaders who will represent the traditional values upon which our great nation was founded, and who will do so boldly and unapologetically. Sen. Buttars has done just that. He was elected in Utah to represent his constituents and the conservative values they hold near and dear. He’s been tested and has passed that test. By bucking left-wing extremism and speaking truth in plain and simple terms, Buttars has shown true leadership. Although his comments certainly lacked in political correctness and were quite direct, they were acutely accurate. Wouldn’t it be nice if more politicians would speak directly and accurately?

“Unfortunately, Senate President Waddoups has failed the same test. He’s responded in exactly the wrong way. No one should be surprised that HRC and other radical leftists are calling for Buttars’ head on a silver platter. That’s what bullies do when they don’t like what they hear. The self-styled proponents of ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’ are the most intolerant and hateful among us.  They allow zero room for dissent and seek to destroy anyone who stands in their way.

“But what is troubling is that Senator Waddoups has played right into their hands. He’s given their radical left-wing agenda an illusory air of legitimacy. He had a golden opportunity to shine here by standing firmly behind Senator Buttars. He could have told these liberal extremists to take their extremism elsewhere. Instead, he threw Senator Buttars under the bus.

“Waddoups’ equivocation is a slap in the face to his own constituents. He’s indirectly told every American who holds a biblical view of sexual morality and who rightfully believes that radical homosexual activism poses a grave threat to our American culture, that they should be ashamed of these traditional beliefs – that they should keep these beliefs to themselves.

“Therefore, I’m asking that people contact Sen. Waddoups and respectfully request that he immediately reinstate Sen. Buttars to his post as chairman of the Judiciary Committee and publicly apologize to both Buttars and to the millions of Americans whose traditional values Waddoups has impugned,” concluded Barber.

(*Titles provided for identification purposes only.)

###

 __________________________________

TAKE ACTION: Contact Utah Senate President Michael Waddoups and other GOP Utah Senate leaders and urge them to reinstate Utah St. Sen Chris Buttars and NOT to punish him for speaking his mind against the aggressive and often hateful homosexual activist movement. Use the following contact information: e-mail: waddoups@utahsenate.org (other GOP State Senate leader e-mails HERE); Waddoups’ senate office: (801) 538-1407 or Utah Senate switchboard: 801-538-1035. Support Buttars at dcbuttars@utahsenate.org. 

UPDATE ON MICHAEL STEELE AND THE LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS:  In a new interview with radio talker Mike Gallagher, GOP Chief Michael Steele firmly rejected “civil unions” as an acceptable GOP compromise on homosexual “marriage” (see this left-wing account HERE). Your calls and e-mails to Steele made a difference!  Stay tuned for updates and you can thank him by calling 202-863-8700, or e-mailing: chairman@gop.com. Here’s the text of the interview (audio link available HERE):

GALLAGHER:  Is this a time when Republicans ought to consider some sort of alternative to redefining marriage and maybe in the road, down the road to civil unions. Do you favor civil unions?

STEELE No, no no. What would we do that for? What are you, crazy? No. Why would we backslide on a core, founding value of this country? I mean this isn’t something that you just kind of like, “Oh well, today I feel, you know, loosey-goosey on marriage.” […]

GALLAGHER: So no room even for a conversation about civil unions in your mind?

STEELE: What’s the difference?

GEORGIA GOP DISTANCES ITSELF FROM LOG CABIN:  WorldNetDaily.com reports that the Georgia Republican Party has issued the following statement on the anti-Christian remarks by Jamie Ensley, president of the Georgia Log Cabin Republicans, who called AFTAH a “domestic terrorist” group and compared us to Nazis: “While a healthy debate on the issues can help strengthen us as a party, to use the word ‘terrorist’ to describe those that disagree with you is not appropriate.” See the full WND story HERE and the AFTAH article containing Ensley’s hateful e-mail to GOP Chairman Michael Steele HERE.

This book is a must for any social conservative’s library. (Order it HERE.) I’ve known Dale for over a decade, and few in the pro-family movement have demonstrated the diligence, courage, dedication and intelligence that she has in answering the various propaganda myths and lies emanating from the radical feminists and their homosexual and gender-confused (”transgender”) allies. Here is a typically sensible quote from One Man, One Woman (p. 217):

It’s true that human beings can be weak, selfish, and sinful, and not every married couple will be good parents. But a male/female married couple nonetheless has built into it all the things children need for healthy development: a mother and a father to fulfill parenting roles and to model gender identity; a vowed bond of permanent commitment between two persons with sexual complementarity; and freedom from the stigma and distractions that accompany “experimental” family forms.

As you can see from the book’s outline below, there are several chapters on the cause and development of “SSA” — Same-Sex Attraction (Disorder), as some call it. I doubt I will agree with everything presented in those chapters, but I’ve always known Dale to make her case thoughtfully, so it will be engaging. You can order Dale’s book HERE. It’s a few dollars cheaper on Amazon. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

This outline is taken from the Sophia Institute Press website, where there is also an essay from Dale titled, “Why I Spent Ten Years Writing This Book, and Why You Need to Read It.”

Contents

Introduction: Clarion Call at Cairo

Part I: The Politics of Sex and Marriage

1. The Political Struggle Over the Definition of Marriage
2. The Ideology of the Sexual Left
3. The Debate Over Same-Sex Attraction

Part II: Understanding Same-Sex Attraction

4. How Sexual Attraction Develops
5. Same-Sex Attraction in Men
6. Same-Sex Attraction in Women
7. SSA Treatment and Change

Part III: Marriage and Intimate Relationships

8. The Definition and Purpose of Marriage
9. Why Redefining Marriage Will Harm Persons with SSA
10. Why Redefining Marriage Will Harm Society

Part IV: The Effects on Children

11. Same-Sex Parenting Places Children at Risk
12. Dangerous Lies: The Politicization of Research

Part V: Beyond Same-Sex Marriage

13. Same-Sex Marriage and the Slippery Slope
14. The Threat to Religious Freedom
15. The Threat to Public Schools

Conclusion: What Must Be Done?
Biographical Note: Dale O’Leary

Sacramento, California — In response to today’s decision by the California Supreme Court to hear the challenges to Proposition 8, the California Marriage Amendment, Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, a leading California-based pro-family organization, issued the following statement:

“It’s unfortunate that the judges are giving time to the mushy, subjective arguments of homosexual activists who reject the clear reading of the constitution and the clear reading of Proposition 8. If the court disobeys the constitution by voiding Prop. 8, it will ignite a voter revolt. It will also threaten the validity of all future constitutional amendments.

“The court is playing with fire by threatening to destroy the people’s vote on marriage. The California Constitution clearly says that the voters have the right to alter the highest law of the land. It’s the beauty of the American system of government. The four Supreme Court justices who unconstitutionally invented homosexual ‘marriages’ — Ron George, Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno — seem to be ignoring the fact that the people get the last word, not the judges.

“The clear reading of the constitution, as well as California’s legal and legislative history, tells us there is a world of difference between a constitutional amendment and a constitutional revision. Proposition 8 is a single-subject, voter-initiated amendment, not a legislature-initiated, multi-issue, whole-scale revision that alters many sections of the state constitution.

“If Prop. 8 gutted the constitution, why is it only one subject in one section of the constitution? If Prop. 8 doesn’t stand, then our constitution doesn’t mean anything, the people’s vote doesn’t mean anything, marriage has been utterly disrespected, and judges lied when they swore to uphold the constitution. Prop. 8 must stand, because the constitution is above the judges, not the other way around.

“Marriage is, was, and should always remain a natural, beautiful relationship between a husband and a wife. Marriage between a man and a woman is an essential, beneficial role model for children to emulate.

“Fortunately, the California Constitution tells us ‘all political power is inherent in the people’ and that ‘they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require’” (California Constitution, Article II, Section 1).

Explaining the clear distinction between an amendment and a revision is University of California, Berkeley Department of Public Science Chairman Emeritus Dr. Eugene C. Lee, who, in 1991, wrote:

Specific changes to the California constitution may be proposed by amendment. Substantial changes may be proposed by a constitutional convention or by the legislature as constitutional revisions. Regardless of their origin, all changes must be approved by a majority of the electorate voting on the issue.

Legislative amendments, the method most commonly used, require a two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature. Initiative amendments may be placed on the ballot by a petition of registered voters equal in number to 8 percent of the total vote cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. By explicit language in the constitution concerning initiatives and by court interpretation with respect to measures arising in the legislature, amendments are required to be limited in scope. As far back as 1894, the California Supreme Court distinguished between a revision of the constitution and a mere amendment thereof (Livermore v. Waite, 102 Cal. 113). As reiterated in 1978, the court held that a revision referred to a “substantial alteration of the entire constitution, rather than to a less extensive change in one or more of its provisions” (Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of Equalization, 22 Cal.3d 208).

Whether in the public and explosive setting of a constitutional convention, as in 1879, or in the relatively calm, almost academic environment of a revision commission some 90 years later, the revision process is intensely political….To be successful, revision requires gubernatorial as well as legislative leadership. Given the requirement of a two-thirds legislative vote, revision involves negotiation and compromise. The agreement implied in an extraordinary legislative vote does not guarantee popular support. Thus, an effective political campaign is essential. But even with a good campaign, success at the polls is not assured. Constitutional revision can be a high-risk endeavor and will continue to be so. These conclusions should be taken seriously in any legislative consideration of constitutional revisions. In addressing the current imperfections of the California constitution, the costs and risks of revision must be weighed carefully against the alternative of carefully targeted amendments.

– Eugene C. Lee, “The Revision of California’s Constitution,” April 1991, commissioned by the California Policy Seminar, University of California, Berkeley

– end –

CAMPAIGN FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (CCF) is a leading West Coast pro-family organization empowering citizens to live out their values. Sign up today for CCF’s FREE Email Bulletins at www.savecalifornia.com.

Your partnership empowers CCF’s innovative work on behalf of children and families in culture, media and government. Please support CCF by making a secure online donation or by sending your tax-deductible gift to:

Campaign for Children and Families
Randy Thomasson, President
P.O. Box 511, Sacramento, CA 95812
(916) 265-5650
www.savecalifornia.com
www.saveamerica.net

http://www.hamtramck.org/family/

Click on photo to enlarge. Opposition to homosexuality- and gender-confusion-based “sexual orientation” laws is something that all committed religious people can agree on — because these laws invariably oppress religious people’s freedom to live out their beliefs. At right is multi-religious, multi-ethnic rally held Oct. 12 in Hamtramck, Michigan against a proposed “gender identity”-inclusive homosexual law.

Press Release
Contacts: Jay McNally: 734 717-1174; Fr. Andrew Wesley: 313 892-1310;
Akm Rahman: 313 293-7343; e-mail:  HamtramckFamily@gmail.com

Dear Readers,

It always strikes me as odd to see homosexual activists aligning themselves with American Muslims, who oppose homosexual practice as sinful in accordance with the religion, like faithful Christians and Bible-believing Jews. These photos from a rally in Hamtramck, Michigan reflect the appropriate political/sociological equation against homosexual activism: religious people (and moral people who are irreligious) cannot abide “rights” based on same-sex misbehavior (sin). In fact, as we’re seeing in California (where Christian doctors will now be forced to perform artificial inseminations for lesbians) and across the nation, the very outworking of government-enforced homosexuality-based “rights” is to oppress religious freedom.

Americans will have to decide whether creating aberrant-sex- and gender-confusion-based “rights” — including “same-sex marriage” and its cowardly cousin, “civil unions” — is worth trampling on the historic religious and First Amendment freedoms that have defined the American republic since its beginning.  –Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Here is the Hamtramck Citizens Opposing “Special Rights” press release put out before the rally; under that is an article on the coalition’s website explaining the coalition’s position:

__________________________________________________

Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu Religious Leaders Speak Out Against Hamtramck Gay-rights Ordinance at campaign rally

HAMTRAMCK (Oct. 10) – Nearly a dozen religious leaders in the City of Hamtramck and a nationally prominent lawyer will speak at a campaign kick-off rally for the group Hamtramck Citizens Voting NO to `Special Rights’ Discrimination.

The rally will be held Sunday, Oct. 12th, from 5 to 6:30 p.m. at the Knights of Columbus Hall, 9632 Conant St. Admission is free.

The speakers will all urge a NO vote on the Nov. 4 referendum concerning the city’s new ordinance that provides special protection to people based on sexual identity, sexual orientation and sexual behavior.
The ordinance provides no new rights for anyone except for homosexuals, as all other rights are covered by state and federal law.

Speakers will explain – in Arabic, Bengali, English and Polish — why the controversial ordinance is a threat to religious freedom, free speech, and women’s privacy rights.

The keynote speaker will be Brian Rooney, attorney for the Thomas More Law Center and legal expert on discriminatory “gay rights” legislation.

Below is a list of speakers scheduled…

Government officials:

•      Abdul Algazali, City Councilman.

Religious leaders (the imams represent various ethnic communities – Yemeni, Bosnian and Bengali}:

•      Rev. Andrew Wesley, pastor of St. Ladislaus Church and co-chair of the group Hamtramck Citizens Voting NO.

•      Najim A. Quddus, imam of the Al Islah Islamic Center in Hamtramck.

•      Masud Khan, president of the Al Islah Islamic Center.

•      Rev. Dharmananda Bikkhu, Budhist monk and founder of the International Peace Community in Hamtramck.

•      Showrob Chudhury, secretary of the Hindu community in Hamtramck.

•      Abdul Latif Azom, imam of Al Falah mosque.

•      Abdul Salam, imam of Masjid Un Nur mosque.

•      Adbo Zindani, secretary of Eiman Islamic Complex.

•      Amin Alwagah, representing Algalazali mosque.

•      Saleh Algahaim, president of Eiman Islamic Complex.

•      Dzenan Kalanac, imam of Bosnia Islamic Center.

•      Mohammed Shehab Khan, imam Baitul Islam mosque

Community leaders:

Several community leaders will also speak, including Akm Rahman, community leader and co-chair of Hamtramck Citizens Voting No.

•      Kamal Rahman, community activist.

•      Roberts Zwolak, former city councilman and city clerk.

•      Gregory Kirchner, businessman and Polish community leader.

•      Mohammed Delaware Hussein, community leader. …

The group’s Web site is www.hamtramck.org/family.

==== 30 ===

———————————————-

Below is an article on the website of Hamtramck Citizens Voting NO to `Special Rights’ Discrimination:

Why Hamtramck’s “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” ordinance a
threat to religious freedom, free speech, and women’s privacy rights.

In the 2004 election, 55 percent of Hamtramck voters voted in favor of a Marriage Protection Amendment to our state constitution, helping preserve one-man, one-woman marriage for future generations of children.

But in June 2008, by a 6-to-1 vote of its politically correct city council, Hamtramck is now among the handful of cities in Michigan whose local ordinances – in conflict with federal and state law – treat homosexual behavior and cross-dressing as the moral, social, and legal equivalents of immutable characteristics such as race, color, and sex.

Obviously, many Hamtramck residents reject that comparison — based on religious, medical, and philosophical concerns.

For example, a compassionate society that rationally discourages smoking because of the clearly identified health consequences should not irrationally enact laws giving special protection to homosexual behavior that has been scientifically associated with a dramatically higher incidence of domestic violence, mental illness, substance abuse, eating disorders, life-threatening disease — AIDS, cancer, and hepatitis — and premature death by up to 20 years.

The Vatican expressed similar concerns in a 1992 letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church – authored by then-Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI – regarding legislation to “Tmake discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation illegal,” which according to Ratzinger, “may in fact have a negative impact on the family and society.”

“Even when the practice of homosexuality may seriously threaten the lives and well-being of a large number of people, its advocates remain undeterred and refuse to consider the magnitude of the risks involved,” Cardinal Ratzinger wrote.  “’Sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc., in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder and evokes moral concern.”

“Including ‘homosexual orientation’ among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate,” Ratzinger wrote, “can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights…(and)…to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality.”

The American Family Association of Michigan strongly agrees.  However, the practical effects of such legislation extend beyond medical or religious concerns.

Proving to have exactly the opposite effect of their supposed intent, so-called “sexual orientation” ordinances have a track record of being used to discriminate against individuals and organizations who don’t support homosexual activists’ political agenda.

Detective Richard Stern, a fifteen-year veteran and president of the Ann Arbor police officers union, was fired after the chairman of the city’s “rights commission” formally accused him of violating that city’s “sexual orientation” ordinance.  Stern’s offense?  On behalf of his union, in a public forum for police chief candidates, he “was accused of saying that one of the candidates had a gay-rights agenda,” according to Between the Lines, a Detroit homosexual advocacy newsmagazine.

“Stern’s comments were clearly in violation of a human rights ordinance that includes sexual orientation,” the newsmagazine commented, making clear that homosexual activists believe so-called “sexual orientation” ordinances outweigh our Constitutionally-guaranteed free speech rights.  Stern’s union disagreed, charging in a lawsuit that he was “illegally and discriminatorily” discharged by the city.

Also in Ann Arbor, the city council – once again specifically citing its discriminatory “sexual orientation” ordinance — banned donations to the United Way through city employees’ payroll deduction plan.  Why?  Because the United Way financially supported local Boy Scout troops, which appropriately refuse to allow adult males who engage in homosexual behavior to take 13-year old boys on overnight camping trips.

“A council majority believes its own anti-discrimination ordinance prohibits it from supporting Boy Scouts in any fashion, including using staff time and city computers for payroll deductions that go through the United Way to the Boy Scouts,” the Ann Arbor News reported.

In an Ann Arbor News commentary supporting the city council’s action, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan said the Boy Scouts’ stand made them comparable to “white supremacist groups.”

Similarly, the homosexual activist group Triangle Foundation threatened to sue the city of Detroit, demanding that city officials cut all funding of local Boy Scout troops, deny the Scouts access to public parks and facilities, and prohibit sponsorship of Scout activities by the police and fire departments, the Detroit News reported.  The Scouts’ refusal to allow openly homosexual Scoutmasters, Triangle charged, “is in direct violation of the City Charter and Human Rights Ordinance…(that) expressly forbid discrimination based on sexual orientation.”

In Philadelphia, under authority of its “sexual orientation” ordinance, the city is currently evicting the local Boy Scout council from offices it has occupied in a city park for nearly 80 years.

In Chicago, Cook County officials refused to hire the Salvation Army to deliver services to low-income residents, saying “the county’s ordinance banning employment discrimination against gays and lesbians bars it from contracting with the Salvation Army,” a traditional Christian denomination whose religious doctrine teaches that homosexual behavior is a sin.

Under Massachusetts’ “sexual orientation” law, Catholic Charities was given an ultimatum: either agree to process adoptions of children to homosexual couples in violation of the church’s moral opposition to such adoptions, or abandon its century-old adoption referral service altogether.  To its credit, Catholic Charities chose the latter.

The “sexual orientation” language now included in the Hamtramck ordinance is disturbing even beyond its proven discriminatory effects in other cities.

The Oakland Press reported in March 2005: “Bill Scharffe, director of bylaw and policy services for the Michigan Association of School Boards, advises local districts not to include the term ‘sexual orientation’ in their anti-harassment policies.  ‘Schools need to be very careful with that,’ he said, noting that neither federal nor state civil rights laws consider people of a particular sexual orientation a protected class.  He added that literal interpretation of ‘sexual orientation’ could include people who gravitate toward any sort of sexual activity, including that with animals, children and corpses.”
Not content with adding the discriminatory “sexual orientation” language to city law, homosexual activists and their political allies succeeded in adding the words “gender identity” as well.

Simply put, “gender identity” refers to delusional men who claim to believe they’re really females stuck in a man’s body and insist on wearing a dress and high heels to work.

This “gender identity” language is so radical in its potential effects that even openly homosexual Congressman Barney Frank, D-Mass., refuses to include it in his federal “gay rights” legislation.

Rep. Frank said: “There are workplace situations — communal showers, for example — when the demands of the transgender community fly in the face of conventional norms and therefore would not pass in any Congress.  I’ve talked with transgender activists and what they want — and what we will be forced to defend — is for people with penises who identify as women to be able to shower with other women.”

Don’t take Barney’s word for it?  Consider the case of “Naomi Snyder,” a Lansing man who applied through the mail – using a female name – for membership at a women’s health club.  His membership approved, he showed up in person, and being obviously a man, was refused entry to the women’s locker room and shower.  According to Between the Lines, the Michigan ACLU threatened to sue for “discrimination,” but Lansing voters in a 1996 ballot vote had wisely rejected adding “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” to their local civil rights ordinance; thus, there was no legal basis for the threatened suit.  But in Hamtramck, now, there would be.

Thankfully, Hamtramck residents who want to protect the privacy of women and girls and prevent discrimination against people of faith and community groups such as the Boy Scouts, the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities, and the United Way can by law conduct a petition drive to force this issue onto the ballot for a vote of the people.  On behalf of our supporters who reside in the city, the American Family Association of Michigan stands ready to assist in any way we can.

PROFITING OFF OF PERVERSION: Miller Brewing Company took out a full-page ad (left) in the 2008 Folsom Street Fair Official Program Guide, on page 40. Five pages before that is this “StraightHell” ad that glories in the depraved and sadistic behaviors celebrated by this annual San Francisco “fair.” At least the gross Folsom ad has got one thing right: these boys are going STRAIGHT TO HELL if they don’t repent of this wickedness and accept Christ’s forgiveness. You can contact Miller though their spokesman Julian Green at green.julian@mbco.com or phone: 1-800-MILLER 6 or 414-931-2000.

Folks, AFTAH is organizing this event in America’s “queer” Mecca later this month to remind the rest of the country (and Californians voting on the marriage protection) about the downward spiraling trajectory of liberal “tolerance” and the homosexual activist agenda. My good friend Linda Harvey will be joining us in exposing this sure-to-be unbelievably evil spectacle occurring on Sept. 28 in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s city. Democrats with any sense of decency and “family values,” as they say, should be ashamed at what their party has become: enablers for the worst public perversions known to mankind (see Mayor Gavin Newsom’s welcoming letter to the Folsom Street Fair HERE). — Peter LaBarbera

PS. The organizers for Folsom tried to intimidate Americans For Truth from publishing graphics from their website and Program Guide — including the welcoming letter from Mayor Newsom, a public servant! It did not work: we have “fair use” rights to expose their filth. More on that in another post.

___________________________________

Mission America writes:

California ‘Corruption Footprint’ Not Wanted in Middle America

September 8, 2008

Contact: Linda Harvey, (614) 442-7998, lpharvey@missionamerica.com

(Columbus, OH) Traditional families, especially children, will be harmed if California forces its sexual deviance on the rest of America, says Linda Harvey of Mission America.

Harvey joins other pro-family groups later this month in San Francisco to protest and expose the Folsom Street Fair, a public street orgy which includes sado-masochism, full nudity and homosexuality. They will also discuss the urgent need to pass Proposition 8, the ballot initiative upholding traditional marriage.

The event falls on Sunday, September 28, following “Leather Pride Week.” The alleged crowd estimate of 400,000 has no age restrictions, merely warnings about the “adult oriented nature” of activities. Last year, children were observed in the crowd where they could witness, for example, bare-bottomed men being whipped.

“There ‘s one big question: why?” said Harvey. ”How can Mayor Newsom, city officials and even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (who represents San Francisco) tolerate disturbed people publicly displaying this deviance as police stand by and do nothing to stop it?

“California’s unsustainable sexual license is not an export we welcome in middle America,” said Harvey. “We don’t want same sex ‘marriage’ legalized, nor to have our children taught to praise homosexuality, as California children now must do after the passage of SB 777 and AB 394. And we don’t want naked people having sex in our streets.” Under the new laws, children must be taught favorable viewpoints about homosexuality and transgenderism. Other opinions are banned.

If Proposition 8 fails  –  and Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama succeed in their stated goal of repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act –  all states could  be forced under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution to recognize homosexual ‘marriages’ legalized by a CA court ruling in May.

Joining Mission America for the protest are Americans for Truth, American Family Association of Pennsylvania, the St. Joseph Men’s Society and other concerned groups.

“The ‘corruption footprint’ of California is staggering,” Harvey stated. “Sadly, San Francisco is a dying city discarding its children. Its only hope is the ‘offset’ provided by the fresh air of California’s traditional, caring families. Hopefully, these families will turn this state around and spare the rest of America from the polluting effects of California’s moral decay.”

Web site: www.missionamerica.com

I haven’t seen any of it yet, but I’ve heard from others that this Coral Ridge panel on the dangers of “Hate Crimes” laws is superb. It features Bob Knight of the Culture & Media Institute; Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel (Matt is also a Board Member of Americans For Truth); Tristan Emmanuel (an honorary American to be sure for his energetic fights for truth in that Thought Police State to the north otherwise known as Canada); and Coral Ridge Ministries’ Jerry Newcombe, another great American.

I strongly urge you to do like I’m going to do and order the Coral Ridge DVD and book set based on this panel (for a $30 recommended donation to Coral Ridge Ministries). As with so many other critical issues, “hate crimes” laws and their implications for American freedoms are hardly being discussed in this presidential campaign season. That’s too bad, but you need to get informed and then educate your network of friends about these dangerous laws. 

Coral Ridge states:

Sometimes the “cure” is worse than the condition. That’s the case with “hate crimes” laws. In the 1980s, they were called the solution to America’s “rising tide of bigotry and bloodshed.”

That tide never came in, but hate crimes laws did. Now they’re on the books in 45 states and at the federal level, posing a clear and present danger to free speech, religious liberty and equal justice. Find out how and why “hate crimes” laws silence Christians, tear the social fabric, burden law enforcement, and lead to same-sex “marriage.”

Get the facts. Get the truths. Discover why hate crimes laws threaten you, your family and Christians everywhere.

Click HERE to order this excellent resource from Coral Ridge Ministries.

I am very conflicted about the boycott taking place because of my history with your company. I stop by my local McDonald’s every day for my large fountain Coke. Even when I travel, I make it a point to get to the nearest McDonald’s for my daily Coke. I have done that for years out of a preference for the taste and out of loyalty. I have read the biography on Ray Kroc and the history of the McDonald’s and have always had admiration for the man and his company. For the first time in my life, you are acting in a way that damages both my admiration and loyalty. I do not want to boycott McDonald’s, but you are forcing me into a position of compromise on doing business with a company every day that undermines my values. I take that personally.

You are going out of your way to put financial resources behind a group of individuals that choose to have sexual relations in an immoral, unnatural and unhealthy way. It would be fine if they were content to keep it to themselves, but they must flaunt this destructive lifestyle, dare to coerce others into supporting it, and threaten and castigate those who do not approve of it.

You have been asked to be neutral and withdraw your corporate sponsorship. It is a fair request for you to simply be neutral and not take a public position either way. Why do you insist on offending the majority of your customers to please a few? Please don’t make me give up my daily visit.

Janine, Illinois

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (Gospel of John 3:13-18)

We pass along this item on the passing of Tony Snow (shown at right in his final televised White House briefing) from Cathi Herrod and the Center for Arizona Policy:

I woke up to the sad news this morning that Tony Snow has passed away. Perhaps one of Tony’s last public appearances was his talk at CAP’s April 29 Making Our Days Count dinner. My favorite quote from Tony rings especially true today: “God bids us to choose. Can we surrender our concern in things that don’t matter so that we might devote our remaining days to things that do?” Tony walked what he talked — his commitment to his walk with the Lord, to his family, and to making a difference was evident. Take a few moments to pray for Tony’s wife Jill and their three children and all those who personally knew and loved Tony Snow. Take a moment also to examine whether you are choosing to devote your remaining days to things that matter.

You can listen to the podcast of Tony’s April remarks and read his memorable column from Christianity Today. Check our website on Monday to view the video of Tony’s April speech.

Yours for Arizona Families,

Cathi Herrod, Esq.
President
The Center for Arizona Policy

By Peter LaBarbera

We’re back from vacation — just in time to state our support for American Family Association’s boycott of McDonald’s. Actually, Americans For Truth has unofficially encouraged a boycott of the fast-food giant for the last few months — after AFA publicized McDonald’s budding, cozy relationship with the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

Today I went on Janet Folger’s “Faith2Action” radio program to express AFTAH’s support for AFA’s boycott. We will be detailing the many ways in which McDonald’s supports homosexuality and gender confusion. The Oak Brook, Illinois-based corporation has an 85 percent ranking in the 2008 “Corporate Equality Index” scorecard put out by the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s leading homosexual pressure group.

You can contact McDonald’s HERE, and we urge you to stop in at the local McDonald’s restaurant that you would normally visit and explain to them in person why your family will no longer be eating there. Here’s one approach:

“My family spends at least __ hundred dollars a year at your restaurant but we will not be visiting again until McDonald’s stops supporting and financing the homosexual agenda. Homosexuality is a sin, and I don’t want my consumer dollars going to subsidize the unhealthy and immoral sexual agendas that undermine marriage. Please convey to McDonald’s national executive team that their decision to promote homosexuality is costing the company business.”

I’ve talked to many pro-family people who already have been boycotting McDonald’s for weeks. The idea has obviously caught on because it’s an easy step to take for the many Americans who are sick and tired of rewarding and subsidizing corporations that promote homosexuality.

On a personal level, from the perspective of a pudgy family man who’s scarfed down, say, about 100 too many Quarter-pounder-with-cheese and Big Mac meals in my lifetime, McDonald is an ideal boycott target. Unless you’re supremely loyal to McDonald’s brand of fattening, greasy burgers, McChicken sandwiches and fries, etc., it’s pretty easy to drive to another fast-food joint or — better for your body — substitute healthy food instead.

Come to think of it, this is one of the few protests against unhealthy lifestyles that can lead you to live a … healthier lifestyle. Two birds with one stone.

Pathetic as it may sound for what it reveals about my eating habits (and in my own defense I do have five kids), I’ve probably avoided spending easily $100-$150 since vowing not to reward the “gay”-promoting fast food chain a while back.

This is a boycott that any American, now matter how “average,” can take part in and help make successful. Past AFA boycotts affected those who may have been in the market to buy a car (Ford) or visit a Florida theme park (Disneyworld), but this boycott is for anyone with enough willpower to redirect his growling stomach away from the Golden Arches as he drives down the road.

How easy is it to punish corporate bad behavior? Just think “McDonald’s — Financing the Unhealthy Homosexual Agenda” and drive on by.

I haven’t seen any data on this, but I’ll bet that McDonald’s execs know full well that “burger loyalty” to their chain is not near what it used to be in an age with so many fast and cheap eating options. We’ll see if they continue to dig in their heels against AFA or actually get out of the Homosexuality Promotion business. (I’d be shocked if the latter happens anytime soon.) On a technical note, we at AFTAH have our own concerns with McDonald’s’ corporate practices that may go beyond those stated by American Family Association; we’ll lay those out for you in forthcoming posts.

Lastly, as a long-time observer of the particular brand of narcissism associated with “gays,” I must add: the spectacle of hordes of body-conscious homosexual men venturing to McDonald’s to buy fattening Quarter-Pounders — just to offset AFA’s boycott — is, well, simply delicious.

Savage is not a Christian — I once heard a fascinating interview he did with the late Jerry Falwell in which he respectfully disagreed with the Gospel — but in many respects he puts Christians to shame with his frank truth-telling about our American culture, which is on life-support, morally and religiously speaking. In a country where even self-professed evangelical Christian leaders and Catholic bishops are now joining the “gay-positive” bandwagon (see this item on evangelicals Tony and Peggy Campolo, and this one ), sometimes it takes an outsider to tell the hard truths. One of those truths is that pro-homosexual activists have indeed invade the schools and youth culture (MTV is now a “gaycame in and indoctrinated a nation of children in a couple of generations, while mom and dad were at work saving up for their plasma TVs.

You can contact Savage here:

Michael Savage Is Right — Children’s Minds Are Being Raped by the Homosexual Mafia

Savage: “The children’s minds are being raped by the homosexual mafia”
http://mediamatters.org/items/200806180005

Responding to a caller who said, “I had to explain to my young son why these two men were holding hands the other day,” radio host Michael Savage stated, during the June 16 broadcast of The Savage Nation, “You’ve got to explain to the children … why God told people this was wrong.” He went on to say, “You have to explain this to them in this time of mental rape that’s going on. The children’s minds are being raped by the homosexual mafia, that’s my position. They’re raping our children’s minds.”

During a discussion about gay marriage with a previous caller, Savage said: “It’s not a joke when you pervert an institution like marriage, which is in trouble enough. It’s not a joke.” He added, “Our children are being destroyed by this.” He went on to say of gay marriage, “It’s a very important story. The children don’t know what to make of it. Children nine, 10 are saying, ‘I’m gay.’ They don’t know what it even means.” He added: “It’s a giant propaganda machine trying to pervert children.”

Talk Radio Network, which syndicates Savage’s show, claims that Savage is heard on more than 350 radio stations. The Savage Nation reaches at least 8.25 million listeners each week, according to Talkers Magazine, making it one of the most listened-to talk radio shows in the nation, behind only The Rush Limbaugh Show and The Sean Hannity Show.

From the June 16 edition of Talk Radio Network’s The Savage Nation:

SAVAGE: San Francisco, Tina, welcome to The Savage Nation.

CALLER: Well, you make a really good point, Michael, and you have a great show, but I still think that you’re not wise in being so adamant about these gay marriages. What difference does it make what they do? You’re going to work yourself to a big heart attack like Tim Russert and –

SAVAGE: No, I won’t work myself into a big heart attack. I’ll tell you why: because the truth will set me free. It always has.

CALLER: But –

SAVAGE: Aren’t you tired of the propaganda that every newspaper you pick up today shows old, ugly women getting married?

CALLER: Well, as a matter of fact, yes, I think that should be a private thing. But I also think –

SAVAGE: Well, why do you suppose every newspaper in America is showing this story?

CALLER: They have an agenda, of course, but still –

SAVAGE: Well, I have an obligation as a social commentator to say enough is enough, I’ve had enough of it. Just as I had enough of the Tim Russert worship on Friday. I had enough of it. I had enough of Obama a year ago — he looks like Alfred E. Neuman to me.

CALLER: It’s a joke, whether you’re gay or straight, it’s mostly a joke, but the thing is we don’t want you to get all –

SAVAGE: It’s not a joke when you steal an institution as fragile as marriage and you pervert it with a mockery. It’s not a joke. It’s not a joke when you pervert an institution like marriage, which is in trouble enough. It’s not a joke. Our children are being destroyed by this.

CALLER: Well –

SAVAGE: I disagree with you totally. It’s a very important story. The children don’t know what to make of it. Children nine, 10 are saying, “I’m gay.” They don’t know what it even means. It’s a giant propaganda machine trying to pervert children. That’s my opinion.

Monterrey, California. Tom, what’s you’re opinion?

CALLER: Yes, I’m calling from the People’s Republic of Monterrey, and I had to explain to my young son why these two men were holding hands the other day and he said, “Dad, didn’t they say that that’s wrong in the Bible?” And I said, “Yes, they did, and yes it’s wrong” and yes to everything that he had to say about it. And I told him, I said, “That’s the wrongest thing you’ve ever seen besides the rest of the politicians and the media and CNBC.” Because –

SAVAGE: You’ve got to try to explain to the children why the — why God told people this was wrong. You’ve got to explain to them, to the children, how it twists everything. Just take them down to a duck pond and show them a boy duck and a girl duck and then show the ducklings and say to them, “There must be a boy duck and a girl duck for there to be babies.” It’s the same with a dog, puppies come from a mother duck — a mother pup, a mother dog. There needs to be a boy dog and a girl dog. You have to explain this to them in this time of mental rape that’s going on. The children’s minds are being raped by the homosexual mafia, that’s my position. They’re raping our children’s minds.

CALLER: I’m not buying into it, which is — I found was pretty neat, but, hey I enjoy your show, keep –

SAVAGE: Well, good, unless somebody else does. Well, OK, you don’t care about it. To me it matters. To me it matters. It’s just that the media is afraid of them or owned by them, and everyone’s catering to them. It’s like catering to Al Sharpton. You see the story that came out on him? You haven’t seen the story all over the media? Can’t report it, why? Because he’s not a white man? So suddenly he’s allowed to do things to companies like Jesse Jackson did for years — without producing a product or a service? Just by threatening a boycott, they give him money? Well there was a name for it when Al Capone was around. I guess that’s gone, gone with the wind, everyone’s afraid in the corporate world, plus it’s not their money anyway. They’re not playing with their money, they’re playing with your money. So the CEOs who run the companies do whatever they want to do with the money including buying off potential boycotts.

Washington, D.C. — The Virginia Supreme Court temporarily avoided locking horns with the state of Vermont today. The Commonwealth’s highest court did not rule on the merits of a case which would have determined whether Virginia will respect the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Virginia’s Marriage Affirmation Act (MAA), and Virginia’s own constitution, or whether it will allow the state of Vermont to redefine marriage and family in the Commonwealth.

The Vermont Supreme Court had granted Janet Jenkins, the former lesbian partner of Lisa Miller, parental rights over Miller’s daughter Isabella, even though Jenkins has no relationship to the little girl and is neither an adoptive nor a biological parent.

In 2006, Virginia decisively passed (with 57 percent of the vote) a constitutional amendment designed to protect families against this exact type of attack. That amendment specifies that Virginia “shall not create or recognize” “civil unions” or “same-sex marriages” from other states, nor can it recognize rulings which stem from such “unions” (like Vermont’s custody ruling).

Today, the Virginia Supreme Court determined that since the MAA and Virginia’s constitutional amendment were not before the court of appeals in this specific proceeding, it could not rule on those issues at this time.

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, “Although we had hoped for a more definitive ruling today on the key issues in question, we’re optimistic that ultimately the state of Virginia will defend its laws, its constitution and the federal DOMA and tell Vermont to keep its ‘civil unions’ to itself. As these issues make their way back through the system, we’re confident that ultimately God’s natural design for marriage and family will prevail.”

Jan Robey, State Director for CWA of Virginia, said, “Aside from the legal ramifications of this ruling, I am most concerned with a 6-year-old girl who is being exploited by ‘gay’ activists. What is the motivation behind this agenda? It has not been in the best interest of Isabella. What is best for Isabella is that she be raised in a Christian home by her biological mother.”

For Information Contact: Natalie Bell: (202) 488-7000
media.cwfa.org

Click HERE to listen to Concerned Women for America’s online radio show:

CWA writes: There is a new law in place in Colorado that prohibits discrimination against transgendered people in any and all public accommodations. Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues speaks with Jim Pfaff, President and CEO of Colorado Family Institute and Colorado Family Action, about this new law that would allow people – regardless of their anatomy – to choose which restroom, locker room or similar accommodation they wish to use. While churches and religious organizations are exempt from this new law both public and private schools must comply, as well as small Christian-owned businesses and individuals making property available for rent. Listen | Download June 5, 2008

California Supreme Court’s Denial of Stay Ignores the Will of the People

Liberty Counsel considers filing petition for stay with the California Court of Appeal

San Francisco, CA, Liberty Counsel, June 4 – Today the California Supreme Court by a 4-3 vote denied the Petition for Stay and for Rehearing in the California marriage cases. The decision was split along the same lines as the original May 15 ruling with Chief Justice George and Justices Kennard, Werdegar and Moreno in the majority. Justices Baxter, Chin and Corrigan dissented. Today’s ruling states that the May 15 “same-sex marriage” decision will become final on June 16, 2008, at 5:00 pm (PT).

Liberty Counsel filed a Petition on behalf of the Campaign for California Families requesting the California Supreme Court to stay its opinion pending the November election. On Monday, the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, certified the California Marriage Protection Act (”Amendment”) for the November 2008 ballot. The Amendment to the California Constitution states: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Thus, neither the courts nor any governmental agency will be permitted to validate or recognize any same-sex marriage license.

The cases now will return to the California Court of Appeal for the Supreme Court’s order to be implemented. Liberty Counsel is considering filing a petition with Court of Appeal requesting a stay pending the outcome of the November vote on the Amendment. The Court of Appeal panel previously upheld the state’s marriage laws.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, who argued the case at every stage of the litigation, commented:

“Denying a stay in light of the certification of the Marriage Protection Act for the November ballot reveals the political agenda of a handful of judges. Judges acting as judges and not as legislators would have granted the stay. The battle over marriage is far from over and will not be decided by four judges. The people will decide in November. If any same-sex ‘marriage’ licenses are issued before November, the passage of the constitutional amendment will make them invalid and invisible.”

By Peter LaBarbera

Here is Americans For Truth’s politically incorrect translation of the Democrat Party’s 2008 homosexual “PRIDE Proclamation,” issued June 3 and found HERE on the Democrat Party’s website. Of course, practicing homosexuality or bisexuality, or embracing gender confusion (transgenderism) is nothing to be “proud” of. Our comments are in black and red; the Democrats’ “Pride Proclamation” is in blue:

_____________________________

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean today joined Massachusetts Democratic Representative Barney Frank and Wisconsin Democratic Representative Tammy Baldwin in issuing the following Proclamation marking PRIDE Month:

“Today, on behalf of Democrats across America, we join together in celebrating the contributions that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans and their families make to our society ….

“Today, on behalf of Democrats across America, we join together in celebrating the contributions that the following Americans — women who engage in (immoral) sex with other women, men who practice (unnatural and destructive) homosexual behavior, men and women who have sex with both men and women, and men who feel they should have been born as women (even though they have male sex organs) and who like to dress, grow breasts and act like they are women — and their families make to our society ….

“…and reaffirm our Party’s commitment to promoting full equality under the law for every American.

“Full equality” … meaning we will take laws and rights designed to fix racial injustice and apply them to changeable sexual misbehaviors and gender confusion — even if that means trampling over the freedoms of other Americans to disagree with those behaviors.

“Full equality” … meaning not that homosexual/bisexual/transsexual Americans have the same rights under the Constitution as everyone else, but that they get special legal rights and protections based on their practice/embrace of aberrant sex and gender confusion. Ex-gays — men and women who leave the homosexual lifestyle — lose such special rights. (We try not acknowledge such people, who usually join the Religious Right and vote Republican anyway.)

Important clarification on “full equality”: of course, we Democrats do not really mean “full equality” — in the “gay” activist sense of the word — because if we were to embrace full legal “marriage,” even as the Party of Homosexuality, that would hurt our ability to get Democrats elected to office. (It’s OK for retired Democrat politicians like Al Gore (at right) to back “gay marriage.”) And so we embrace “civil unions” — which are pretty much “same-sex marriage” by another name — for the time being.

In the same way that we continually profess to be “against abortion” (while supporting full legal abortion-on-demand at all stages of pregnancy, even for partial-birth abortions that are really infanticide), we mustn’t as a party move too fast on homosexuality and transsexuality — lest rank-and-file Democrats catch on to our radicalism and vote Republican. So give us a few years — after our friends in the corporate world, media and Hollywood soften up America a bit more — and then we promise to cave in completely to the Pro-Sodomy, Pro-Gender-Confusion Agenda.

“As leaders of the Democratic Party, we stand proudly with the LGBT community and commit ourselves to working together to build an America that is truly inclusive.

When we say “inclusive,” we do not mean inclusive of pro-family Democrats who oppose sodomy-based, counterfeit “marriage” and homosexuality-based “special rights.” After all, the GLBT wing of our Party has made it clear that far from being “pro-family,” these Democrats are actually hateful, homophobic, prejudiced Neanderthals who desperately “cling to their Bibles” to uphold their narrow-minded bigotry. So, although we throw them an occasional bone or two — and of course allow them to profess their “pro-family” credentials to their backwater constituencies — we Democrats will be about as “inclusive” toward our social conservatives as we are toward pro-life Democrats.

Our (two-faced) Diversity & Inclusion Strategy can be cumbersome to administer: for example, we must reject most requests from so-called “pro-life” (that is, anti-women’s-right-to-choose) Democrats who continually pester us for a primetime speaking spot at Democrat presidential nominating conventions. This is something we simply cannot allow lest we alienate our progressive, pro-choice, feminist and lesbian party members.

“Every American has the right to live in dignity, with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law.

By “dignity” and “equal rights,” we of course mean only for the babies who happened to have survived the abortion industry. (We Democrats accord no rights or dignity to innocent unborn children.) The woman’s “right to choose” is preeminent in our Party and we will resist all propagandistic efforts by anti-abortion zealots to remind our constituents that the unborn child has no “choice” whatsoever as to whether or not he or she gets killed through abortion.

As for committed Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others who act on their sincere religious belief that homosexual behavior is sinful, we implicitly encourage all campaigns to label these Americans as “homophobes, haters and bigots” (except in more conservative districts where we need the votes of these people to beat Republicans). At times we as a Party will cynically use people’s opposition to homosexuality for political gain. At the same time, we will make cynical insinuations to the media that “fundamentalist” Republicans are the modern moral equivalent of racists because … well … that’s what our powerful GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) party members and donors tell us to do. And our GLBT donors like Tim Gill give the Democrat Party lots of money and help in beating Republicans.

“These are our country’s and our Party’s core values.

As Democrats, we must never stray from our core social values (we’ll pretend they are the nation’s): the protection of abortion-on-demand right up through the end of pregnancy (and even for babies “born alive” through botched abortions), and the celebration of homosexuality, bisexual and transsexuality – using all available governmental power to impose both on America.

Concurrently, we must always take pains to express our religiosity, stressing that Christians, too, can support “choice” and “GBLT equality.” We have learned to rely on Evangelical consultants for guidance on which “Christian-sounding” words to use to appeal to Christian voters, even as we pursue anti-Biblical policies. (We are told that it is best not to use actual Biblical references when trying to justify these positions — except taking “Judge not lest you be judged” (Matthew 7:1) out of context. A far more effective rhetorical strategy is to keep talking euphemistically about rights, equality, discrimination, choice, tolerance, etc. These words intimidate good-hearted but naive Christians from actually examining our Party’s social record.

“Across the country, at every level of government, Democrats have championed sweeping protections in the areas of employment, housing,

Across the country, at every level of government, we Democrats have championed legislation that for the first time in history accords legal rights based on unhealthy sexual misbehavior — conduct revealed by the God of the Bible (never use that phrase) to be “detestable” and which is proscribed throughout recorded human history. (We must remember that the Bible, like the Constitution, is an evolving document; never use the phrase “absolute truth.”)

And even though, due to political correctness, people who identify as “gay” are becoming in many areas the least likely Americans to fired (they are now recruited by major firms and universities based on their homosexual self-identification), we as Democrats are embracing “sweeping” pro-homosexual legislation that will likely trample on the rights of traditionalists who believe homosexuality is wrong. (Do not remind Americans of the Boy Scouts unless in a liberal, big-city environment like Philadelphia, where harassing and demonizing the Scouts is seen as progressive.) We know these stubborn bigots will likely vote Republican anyway, and we are counting on our many friends in the media not to give such cases much publicity. Democrats must continue to extol “faith, family and freedom” even as we support legislation at the federal and state level that directly undermines all three.

On that subject, we strongly support the federal ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) bill — which will be a tremendous boon for our party’s liberal lawyers constituency. ENDA would force all but America’s smallest businesses to adhere to a pro-homosexual orthodoxy at the threat of potential “gay” lawsuits. (Remember that many entrepreneurs vote Republican anyway.) We as Democrats must avoid at all costs questions like the following: Under ENDA, would a Muslim-owned day care business (not tied to a mosque) have the right NOT to hire homosexuals?

Regarding housing “discrimination,” we Democrats know full well that is there is no homosexual housing crisis. Far from it. In fact, in some homosexual enclaves, there is a reverse redlining of sorts by which heterosexual homeowners feel excluded by homosexuals who manage to fill neighborhoods with nothing but “gay”-owned houses. And homosexuals travel abroad at rates higher than the average American.

We must continue to obfuscate on the fact that homosexuals as a group never faced economic deprivation like our African-American party members even though they are stealing the Civil Rights model to advance their pro-homosexual agenda. Avoid at costs cases like [Americans for Truth Board Member] Matt Barber and Crystal Dixon — who were fired for opposing homosexuality and, in the case of Dixon, an African-American, for disputing our liberal “diversity” dogma equating homosexuality with civil rights. Never say the words “Crystal Dixon”: we are counting on the mainstream media’s non-interest in this story to help her case against the University of Toledo die a slow death.

Let us re-double our efforts to affirm that our Party’s pro-homosexuality agenda has something to do with the historic, noble Black civil rights movement when in reality we know that African Americans strongly resist such notions. Carefully avoid calling African-Americans “bigots,” as some overzealous GLBT and progressive Democrats are wont to do, as this message plays poorly to African-Americans and the media.

“… domestic partnerships and civil unions, adoption

[See above point on "full equality"]. We as Democrats support legislation that gives marriage-type benefits to non-marital relationships: both straight couples — the ones the Religious Right Republicans say are “living in sin,” who are unwilling to make the marital commitment — and homosexual “partners” whose immoral couplings (some bigots claim) should not subsidized and rewarded by government.

Many hateful Religious Right propagandists — selectively quoting our Founding Fathers — claim that the purpose of government from a traditional (Biblical) perspective is to discourage sinful conduct through the law (e.g., punish “sins”). We Democrats, our progressive minds expanded by years of Social Left advocacy, (and by pandering to wealthy GLBT special interests), have grown beyond these antiquated notions — actually flipping them on their heads.

We Democrats happily advocate the use of government to reward non-marital arrangements. Personal rights are preeminent. We advise candidates to champion marriage on the campaign trail but then to undermine it with the help of our GLBT friends in Washington, D.C.

We Democrats will continue to seek ways to provide wayward citizens further incentives to practice destructive and sinful sexual behaviors — ultimately to the harm of children who will have even a greater chance to be placed in homosexual-led households where they will be denied (intentionally) the blessing of either a mom or a dad. Special Note: avoid discussing “gay adoption” on the campaign trail as this concept still rankles many Bible- and Koran-toting Americans adhering to idealistic, Norman Rockwell-esque notions of mother-father parenthood and the so-called “traditional family.”

“… gender identity or expression, and hate crimes.

Though as stated above we Democrats do not recognize even the right to life of some in our human family, we do favor the creation of new and creative legal “rights” based on what some transphobic Republican bigots call gender confusion — men and women who choose to live their life as if they were a member of the other sex. “Gender identity” is a far more accurate term for this healthy phenomenon, but we must as a Party tread carefully on this issue as American transphobia is far more virulent — even among minorities — than homophobia. (Biphobia is also very potent.)

With this reality in mind, we must keep men in dresses and high heels far from Democratic campaign events and relegate our transsexual (like homosexual) Democrat convention speakers to daytime or late-night, non-primetime TV times. We also understand that the “T” in the homosexual/bi/trans’ agenda’s “GLBT youth” equation stands for “transgender,” but highly recommend that any discussion of transgender youth — e.g., boys going to school in a dress — be avoided until America “grows” as a nation and sheds its many prejudices. In fact, we advise that all discussions of GLBT youth be avoided — except in Democrat strongholds like Massachusetts — until further guidance from the Party.

“Despite all we have accomplished, our work is not done. We need to fight efforts to write discrimination into our laws and constitutions.

This is the Gayspeak we use to say that we as Democrats oppose all efforts by American citizens to actually preserve the age-old definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Curiously, we do this while we continue to proclaim that we oppose same-sex “marriage,” knowing that our GLBT allies are working day and night to radically redefine it. (The ends justify the means for us progressives.) We realize that the our blatantly heterosexist GOP opponents — who shamelessly exploit pro-marriage referendums for political gain — will say that the Democrat Party has slipped so far in kowtowing to homosexual activists that they now regard people rising up to protect marriage as “discrimination.” But that doesn’t matter, as long as the American people fail to catch on to the truth that the same “discrimination” rhetoric we use to bludgeon Republicans could also be applied to historical American efforts to ban polygamy in this country.

For the most part, our Democrat “gay marriage” strategy is simple: claim we are for defending marriage while we play dumb and enable our GLBT activist party members and activist judges to destroy its meaning. This strategy depends heavily on media non-interest and pro-homosexual reporting.

“We need to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, pass the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act, and repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’

[See ENDA comments above.] Such is our determination as Democrats to advance LBGT equality (read: do the bidding of the radical Homosexual Lobby) that we will even attempt to force homosexuality into the armed forces, during wartime no less. We regret that ignorant, Republican-sympathizing homophobes will charge that we Democrats are moving America toward the ‘Criminalization of Christianity’ — by supporting legislation like ENDA that will make it illegal for business owners and everyday Americans to live out their religious and moral beliefs about homosexuality. But that’s OK: we’re the Party that takes in the massive “gay” donations — while the homosexual Log Cabin Republicans are still years away from dominating their party (but making headway fast thanks to enlightened Republicans like Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger).

We Democrats also favor hate crimes laws despite the exaggerated claims of anti-gay bigots like Gary Glenn and Chuck Colson who accuse us of creating a legal hierarchy of victims so that some victims — say, people practicing homosexuality or — receive more and better law enforcement protection than others — say, average heterosexual guys. Moreover, such hate-mongering homophobes falsely accuse us of moving toward the suppression of “hate speech” — as if we Democrats would ever squelch the ideas of our opponents [see point above on our Party's commitment to "inclusion"].

“We need a comprehensive, science-based strategy for combating HIV/AIDS.

Now, when we say “science,” that does not include the prudish Republican-Christian-Right-inspired idea of a governmental study on the health risks homosexual behaviors — e.g., anal sex and other male-on-male sodomies. Sure, there is ample evidence that certain behaviors fuel HIV and other the sexual diseases. (The CDC reports that in 2005, “men who have sex with men” (MSM) accounted for 71% of all HIV infections among male adults and adolescents” (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/resources/factsheets/msm.htm.) But we must be practical: some science hits too close to home and we can’t risk alienating our wealthy “gay” Democratic base. So we as Democrats vow to perpetuate the national charade that pretends that AIDS is a disease that “doesn’t discriminate” when it clearly does. (See notorious Michigan homophobe Gary Glenn’s handiwork: “AFA-Michigan, AFTAH Welcome Gay Task Force Admission: ‘HIV Is a Gay Disease.’“)

“We must address the socioeconomic problems, including poverty and limited access to health care, that increase vulnerability to this disease.

Read: we’ll do anything but deal honestly with the actual behaviors causing the spread of HIV/AIDS in America: homosexual behavior (men having “sex” with other men) and IV drug abuse.

“To do all of these things we need to put a Democrat in the White House, expand our majorities in Congress, and elect more Democrats at the local and state level across the country. To do that, we need you. Get active, get involved, and join us so we can take our country back.”

No comment. (We can’t.)

NOTE: Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (www.aftah.org) is a nonpartisan organization concerned with the promotion of homosexuality in any party — Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitution, etc. Readers can contact the Democrat Party HERE or the Republican Party HERE.

California’s four judges ruled that there is a fundamental human right to same-sex marriage.

Worse, for the very first time a U.S. high court has specifically ruled that “orientation” should be treated exactly the same way that race is in U.S. law.

We warned you this was coming: California’s highest court now says that if you disagree with it about same-sex marriage, you are the moral equivalent of a racist.

That’s right, those of us who see marriage as a sacred union of husband and wife are just like bigots who opposed interracial marriage. The California Supreme Court just declared the 4.6 million Californians who voted for Prop 22 no better than racists.

As I told my wife, “I can’t believe it but they really said it: my Christian faith is a form of bigotry.”

I don’t know about you, but to me them’s fighting words!

Indeed. Of course, homosexual activists have been pushing the same misguided analogy between racism and opposition to homosexuality for years. They do have a problem, however, with the rise of African Americans to the forefront of nationwide efforts to prevent marriage from being radically and “queerly” redefined. The California Supreme Court decision is available at: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF