This is Walt in his fantasy identity as "Laura." Heyer's grandmother dressed him up as a girl when he was a young boy.
The following is Part Three of my interview with Walt Heyer, a man who left the confused world of “transsexuality” — after he had gone through “gender reassignment surgery.” In this discussion — which aired August 13, 2011, we discuss Walt’s autobiographical book, “Trading My Sorrows,” and how faithful Christians reached out to him in the grace of God. Heyer’s websites are www.TradingMySorrows.com and www.SexChangeRegret.com. Go here to listen to Part One and Part Two of this fascinating interview. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes. Do not use Real Player.It is not supported and there may be difficulty when listening with it. Left click once on the link below to play.(Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment or two to load.) OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.
Will businesses cave to homosexual lobby group’s brazen demands?
Should American consumers and taxpayers subsidize body-disfiguring "Sex Reassignment Surgeries" for gender-confused individuals? Above is Autumn Sandeen, a man who left his wife and kids to become a transsexual activist. Sandeen's ex-wife told AFTAH that she discovered his perverse cross-dressing desires when she found a dress that wasn't hers in the clothes dryer. Click on photo to enlarge.
Folks, every time I think I’ve seen it all regarding the Homosexual Lobby’s fanatical demands, they come up with something new that dumbfounds me in its astonishing arrogance and chutzpah. Check this out: the anti-Christian, anti-Bible (and yes, anti-God) homosexual lobby group Human Wrongs Rights Campaign (HRC) has added coverage for transsexual sex-change operations to its 2012 Corporate Scorecard criteria. These perverse criteria gauge how compliant major corporations are to HRC’s radical homosexual/bisexual/transsexual agenda. The D.C.-based lobby organzation wants at least $75,000 in “health” coverage for tranny sex-change operations for the corporation to get a perfect rating.
HRC is led by well-paid secular bigot Joe Solmonese, who also is DEMANDING an apology from the Mormon Church because a church official affirmed Mormon teachings on the sin of homosexuality. HRC’s hugely-funded PAC is deeply involved in elections across the country: you can check out how your Congressman and Senators rated on the homosexual agenda criteria by linking to their Congressional Scorecard.
“Where available for employees, the following benefits should all extend to transgender individuals, including for services related to transgender transition (e.g., medically necessary services related to sex reassignment):
Short term medical leave
Mental health benefits
Pharmaceutical coverage (e.g., for hormone replacement therapies)
Coverage for medical visits or laboratory services
Coverage for reconstructive surgical procedures related to sex reassignment”
Why are Republican leaders like Sen. John Cornyn courting this radical group?
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
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.
For the last few weeks I’ve been working with Mass Resistance’sAmy 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
Below are some Highlights of Elena Kagan’s Record as Dean at Harvard Law School, 2003-2009:
Kagan accelerated and legitimized the GLBT “rights” concept and law studies at Harvard Law School and in the larger university community.
Kagan encouraged Harvard students to get involved in homosexual activist legal work. At a time when she as Dean pushed students to engage in “public interest law” and to get “clinical” legal experience, the Harvard Law School established the LGBT Law Clinic. How could a “Justice Kagan” on the Supreme Court be impartial involving cases brought by “gay” legal activists — when she so openly advocated for homosexual legal goals and integrating homosexuality into legal studies and practice at Harvard?
Kagan recruited former ACLU lawyer (and former ACT-UP member) William Rubenstein to teach “queer” legal theory. Few Americans can comprehend the radical nature of “queer” academics. Rubenstein described one of his courses as the taking up of “newer identities (bisexuality, trans, gender[f**k]).” as well as involving “polygamy, S&M [sadomasochism], the sexuality of minors.”
“It is important to say that under Rehoboth law this was not against the law … In this case, they had male genitalia; therefore, they are not guilty of a crime.”– Rehoboth, Del., Police Chief Keith Banks
If transgender 'she-males' go topless, is it public nudity? Cops in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, say "No." Above, a male-to-female transsexual bares his presumably hormone-induced breasts while riding atop a float at the 2007 Chicago Gay Pride parade. The "she-male" rode for blocks in the parade as police took no action against him. Covered photo: Americans For Truth.
God help us. We have become a sick and very weird culture. In the good old days (before “she-males” existed), they would just call such people “perverts.” America was better off then. Check out in the piece below the anger of the local homosexual activist at the end of this story: no, Steve, what is truly “horrific” is that men are pretending to be woman, growing hormone-induced “breasts,” demanding “rights” based on their twisted gender choices, and then making even a bigger circus out of it all by going “topless” in public.
Can you see the misogyny in action here? In many ways, male transsexuals create in their reconstructed image a crude and deviant caricature of women (what they imagine being a woman is all about). I suppose in this case (and that of the “gay pride” photo above), we see men attempting to “live out” their fantasy — or delusion — of “being” slutty women. Too weird. Besides, in our depraved culture, aren’t there enough slutty women out there already that we don’t need men to “create” some more?
Only a nation that has kicked God to the curb would be on the verge of creating federally-guaranteed employment “rights” based on such unbelievable gender confusion. (That’s what ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, would do.) Imagine all the trouble that activist “trannies” could cause for employers once they figure out the special treatment they can get merely by crying “discrimination!” Heck, they might show up at the company picnic in a low-cut halter top with lots of (fake) “cleavage” showing — just for the fun of it. The rest of us will have to bite our tongues or risk a Lambda Legal lawsuit. Don’t tell me this is what Martin Luther King died for! — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
P.S. Big surprise: Rehoboth is a popular “gay” destination.
(delawareonline.com) June 3, 2010– Rehoboth Beach and the local Internet have been buzzing for days after a few transgendered men caused a stir on the beach over the holiday weekend by removing their tops and revealing their enhanced breasts.
Police there were called to the beach after lifeguards requested that the sunbathers replace their tops.
“Passers-by came up to the lifeguard and said they were alarmed and unhappy with the females showing their breasts,” Police Chief Keith Banks said. “The lifeguard responded and saw that they were males.”
Banks said police were called because the men originally refused to put their tops back on, but had consented before police arrived. Officers made sure the situation was under control, and no citations were issued.
Banks said it could have been difficult to issue a citation because Rehoboth law defines indecent exposure two ways:
“A male is guilty of indecent exposure if he exposes his genitals or buttocks under circumstances which he knows his conduct is likely to cause affront or alarm to another person.
“A female is guilty of indecent exposure if she exposes her genitals, breasts or buttocks under circumstances which she knows her conduct is likely to cause affront or alarm to another person.”
So the men’s behavior may have been upsetting, but it was not illegal.
We should have seen Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak’s sellout on abortion and ObamaCare coming. Here is a video of Rep. Stupak, a Democrat, at a townhall meeting with constituents in Cheboygan, Mich., on Oct. 29, 2009. Other “Profiles in Cowardice” abound, as pro-life advocate Jill Stanek reports:
The only pro-life Democrat to change his vote from a yes to a no due to the failure to include the Stupak-Pitts amendment was Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL), pictured [right]. (Lipinski is the congressman for the district in which Christ Hospital, my former employer, is located. His father, Congressman Bill Lipinski, was a co-sponsor of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.)
Remember: the same dynamic (bogus “rights”) that will expand taxpayer funding/subsidies of abortion will also be at work expanding taxpayer funding of gruesome transsexual “sex-change” operations — unless we as Americans act to stop it. To read more of Stanek’s ObamaCare analysis, go HERE.
Navy Capt. Jim Jefferis in uniform shortly before his retirement. He says the inevitable homo-sexual relationships that would occur in a homosexual-welcoming Navy would lead to preferential treatment that "can’t be hidden from other crewmembers and tends to destroy the chain of command, discipline and morale."
Folks, the following letter from Ret. Navy Captain Lawrence “Jim” Jefferis to Admiral Mike Mullen — President Obama’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a proponent of his plan to allow open homosexuals in the military — is one of the most compelling documents I have ever read against that terribly misguided idea. In an e-mail to AFTAH, Capt. Jefferis verified his authorship of the letter, which has been making the rounds via e-mail. He said that he had sent it to a few people with no intention of it going public, but now that it has, he is willing to have it published online.
Like me, I’m sure you feel a deep sense of sorrow that men of principle and common sense like Capt. Jefferis are being replaced in America’s military leadership by a new cast of politically correct officers like Adm. Mullen, who put dubious trends and expediency above principle and morality. Please read this letter carefully and then share it with your children, all of your elected representatives, and as many people as possible. God bless you, Capt. Jefferis, and thank you for your service to our country. — Peter LaBarbera, www.AmericansForTruth.com
TAKE ACTION: Send a copy of this letter by regular mail or fax (or e-mail) to your Congressman and Senators; go to www.congress.org to get their information. Or call Congress at 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121 and urge them to oppose President Obama’s attempt to do an end-run around Congress to force open homosexuality on our Armed Forces. Also urge your elected representatives to OPPOSE H.R. 1283, which we’re calling the Homosexualize Our Military Act–a dangerous bill that would impose a “sexual orientation” non-discrimination order on the military.
WARNING: Offensive Content Seeking to Describe Transsexualism
Rhiannon O’Donnabhain -- a man -- won his quest to get a tax deduction for his "sex-change" operation.
Folks, America’s rapid descent into post-Christian chaos continues. The 11-5 U.S. Tax Court decision below now gives a (sizeable) monetary incentive for men and women steeped in gender confusion to go through grotesque and horrifying, body-disfiguring “sex-change” operations. I’m saying this as someone who attended a “female-to-male” “transgender” conference where I witnessed young, early-twenties women showing off their newly-flattened chests — after their healthy breasts were surgically removed in their quest to be like men.
Yes, in the Brave New “Transgender” World, trans women cut off their healthy breasts while their male counterparts seek to grow a feminine-like pair in a pathetic attempt to become like women. (And “pathetic” doesn’t begin to describe the MtF — male-to-female — transsexual’s effort to create a makeshift “vagina” from his surgically-dismantled, once-healthy penis.)
Note the last paragraph in the AP story below: this poor man – yes, he is still a man — Rhiannon O’Donnabhain — actually sought a deduction for his follow-up boob job, after he had already grown fake breasts by taking female hormones. (The latter “augmentation” deduction was denied.) Who could make this stuff up?
Men were never intended to have sex with men, nor were they intended to try to turn their bodies, as God made them — into female bodies, as God made them. Wake up, America: your judicially-approved tax code is now creating incentives for one of the most tragic manifestations of rebellious man’s claim to know better than God. In the meantime, Mister O’Donnabhain needs our prayers. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
P.S. Does this mean that parents, too, are going to receive a tax break for pushing aggressive “transgender” treatments on their gender-confused children?
(Boston) The U.S. Tax Court ruled Tuesday that a Massachusetts woman should be allowed to deduct the costs of her sex-change operation, a decision that could have broad implications for transgender people.
Rhiannon O’Donnabhain (oh-DON’-oh-vin), who was born a man, sued the Internal Revenue Service after the agency rejected a $5,000 deduction for approximately $25,000 in medical expenses associated with the sex-change surgery.