Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013
Even FOX News is biased in favor of homosexual “marriage”
Shepard Smith has demonstrated his pro-homosexual bias on air as a FOX News anchor.
The following Skype interview by America’s Survival founder Cliff Kincaid with AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera aired on AS’s Roku channel June 26, 2013. The two discuss the Supreme Court’s striking down of Section 3 of DOMA and the Court’s Prop 8 ruling. In discussing the media’s strong pro-”gay” bias, LaBarbera reports that a major Pew Research Center study of media coverage on homosexual “marriage” found that even FOX News’ reporting was biased in favor of “same-sex marriage.”
Kincaid then reveals that veteran FOX News anchor Shepard Smith has for the third year in a row been listed (along with Matt Drudge) in the homosexual magazine OUT‘s “Power 50″ list of the 50 most powerful homosexuals in America. (Smith is not publicly homosexual, nor is Drudge — but neither was CNN’s Anderson Cooper when he was similarly listed for years by OUT — only to “come out” as a public homosexual last year.)
Kincaid also discusses Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s alleged lesbianism, and LaBarbera describes the rise of a new “ex-gay” Christian umbrella group (Restored Hope Network) that replaces the now defunct Exodus International – which cravenly abandoned its defining mission of helping men and women abandon homosexuality. You can watch the interview on America’s Survival’s YouTube channel here: http://youtu.be/Si8SuFujq0M
Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013
According to Justice Anthony Kennedy, congressional supporters of DOMA were “blinded by a desire to ‘demean,’ ‘harm,’ ‘injure,’ and ‘degrade’” homosexual couples,” writes Jan LaRue.
This column by stellar pro-family culture warrior and legal analyst Jan LaRue first appeared in American Thinker (which we highly recommend) July 2, 2013. It is reprinted with the permission of the author. To read other AT columns by LaRue, go HERE. –PL
SCOTUS Amends the Declaration of Independence
By Jan LaRue
Thomas Jefferson, call your office. Five lawyers on the Supreme Court have issues with your handiwork.
A revised version of the Declaration is the inevitable outcome of their opinions in the same-sex “marriage” cases hammered down on Wednesday in Windsor v. United States and Hollingsworth v. Perry.
For those who think those rulings are merely about an insignificant “social issue,” think again. In the words of the Prophet Isaiah:
“Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands far off. For truth has stumbled in the public square, and honesty cannot enter. Truth is missing, and whoever turns from evil is plundered.”
For starters, Mr. Jefferson, “appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions,” even when it comes to marriage created by our “Creator” is so 1776.
You and your 55 co-signors of the Declaration didn’t get this line right either:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
So five wise guys and gals, not to be confused with Solomon, tweaked it, finding their inspiration in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Their revised standard version reads:
“We hold these delusions to be pretty darn clear that all people are whatever the heck they self-identify as, regardless of biology or DNA, endowed by their Supreme Judges with life, except, of course, for the unborn; liberty, meaning “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life,” as long as it doesn’t offend the moral judgment of the Supreme Judges whose moral judgments trump those of their Subjects.”
Justice Anthony (“Swinging”) Kennedy wrote the incoherent majority opinion in Windsor, throwing out Section 3 of DOMA. That section defines the term “marriage” as one man and one woman “for all purposes under federal law, including the provision of federal benefits.”
Kennedy, armed with his irrational basis test and magic spectacles, found that DOMA violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment because it “singles out a class of persons deemed by a state entitled to recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty.”
Read the rest of this article »
Thursday, June 27th, 2013
Contact: Peter LaBarbera: 312-324-3787; email@example.com
The following statement was issued June 27 by Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality:
Yesterday’s decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and effectively invalidating Californians’ vote to preserve marriage as between a man and a woman — continues America’s godless trajectory toward sexual and gender chaos. We have become a Profane Nation at war with our own heritage and the Judeo-Christian moral values that helped make us great.
Healthy societies discriminate against sexually immoral behavior: homosexuality, sex outside marriage, pornography, incest, etc. This benefits children and adults by using the law to reinforce stable moral boundaries and steer citizens away from destructive (sinful) behaviors. So it was stunning to read the majority decision by Justice Anthony Kennedy – a Reagan appointee – overturning DOMA’s pro-natural-marriage provision in the name of the children.
Kennedy surely has earned his future laudatory obit in the New York Times for capitulating to “gay” activist ideology — but among clear-thinking Americans who still know right from wrong he will go down in history as one more craven elitist who sold out Almighty God for a place in the Gay Hall of Fame.
Jettisoning the dictates of his own Catholic religion – which has some pretty strong words for putting children in homosexual-led households – Kennedy declares that by not recognizing legalized homosexual “marriages” in New York and other states, DOMA:
…“places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage. The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects….And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples.”
What philosophical drivel. Only a decadent society — in which God and common sense have been kicked to the curb – would use its laws to enforce the egalitarian nightmare whereby government treats households that are fatherless or motherless ‘by design’ as if they are morally and practically equivalent to normal mom-and-dad homes. (And if you dare to disagree, you’re a hateful bigot.)
Homosexual practice is a perversion and homosexual role models are NOT healthy for kids. Neither is replacing dad with a “second mom,” or mommy with Daddy Number Two.
The Kennedy majority’s legal insanity is what emerges from an Isaiah 5:20 culture (evil is good and good evil) that puts deviant sexual identities on a pedestal, to be celebrated as protected “civil rights.” The LGBT Pandora’s Box has been flung open, and there will be much more folly and destruction to follow — including the public policy madness of establishing “gender identity” (read: extreme gender confusion) as a parallel “civil right.”
At least the Supreme Court did not create a national “right” to homosexual “marriage.” But we must be vigilant, as future LGBT litigation, coupled with the appalling self-righteousness of Kennedy’s liberal court majority, will combine to make this the next goal of the judicial supremacists.
Monday, April 8th, 2013
“Gay” activists have been promoting the acceptance of homosexual relationships — even to young children – for decades. (This is a page from the 1991 “children’s” book, “Daddy’s Roommate.”) For conservatives to now claim that the debate over “same-sex marriage” is NOT about homosexuality is disingenuous and actually helps normalize the sin of homosexual behavior. Sentence at bottom of page reads, “Being gay is just one more kind of love.” (Click to enlarge.)
“Moral judgment undergirds the entire structure of laws and is necessary for the rational structure of any significant statute. The idea that our laws can stand independent of moral foundation is senseless. We do not think that driving under the influence of alcohol is simply risky, in terms of statistics. We believe that it is wrong, in terms of explicit moral judgment.” –Al Mohler
This is an important piece by Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and we applaud him for writing it. To say that the struggle to preserve marriage from being homosexualized requires “no judgment about the morality of homosexuality” is pure folly and a recipe for defeat. It is a negation of common sense, like telling pro-lifers not to make the case for the humanity of the unborn in arguing against pro-abortion laws.
By pretending that the homosexual “marriage” debate is not really about homosexuality, well-intended people are actually advancing the godless crusade to normalize immoral same-sex behavior and relationships in society. (A neutral response to sin — or a reluctance to confront it — by religious people who know better actually propels sin forward.) We need to rebuild the moral consensus against homosexual behavior, but you cannot do that by running away from the issue.
Substitute another (less politically correct) sexual misbehavior and this formula make no sense: Imagine if conservatives were to carefully avoid discussing, say, the morality of adultery (or worse, talk about respecting the “needs” of adulterous “couples”); would that not be cheered by sexual anarchists and the “open marriage” crowd?
In other words, to fight one evil (homosexual “marriage”), some of our Best and Brightest are effectively lending aid to another, by undermining the moral/spiritual/practical case against homosexuality — a perversion that just a few decades ago was so widely deplored that it was barely mentioned in polite society. We conservatives and people of faith need to talk more about the immorality and tragic realities of homosexuality, not less. – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH
Reprinted with permission from http://www.albertmohler.com/2013/04/01/bracketing-morality-the-marginalization-of-moral-argument-in-the-same-sex-marriage-debate/:
Bracketing Morality — The Marginalization of Moral Argument in the Same-Sex Marriage Debate
By Albert Mohler
Monday, April 1, 2013
“Somewhere along the way, standing up for gay marriage went from nervy to trendy.” This was the assessment offered by Frank Bruni, an influential openly-gay columnist for The New York Times. Bruni’s column, published just as the Supreme Court was poised to hear oral arguments in the two same-sex marriage cases now before it, is a celebration of the fact that, as he sees it, same-sex marriage is soon to be the law of the land, whatever the Court may decide. “The trajectory is undeniable. The trend line is clear. And the choice before the justices is whether to be handmaidens of history, or whether to sit it out.”
Bruni may well be right, given the trajectory and the trend-line he has described. Of course, Bruni, along with his fellow columnists, editors, and reporters for The New York Times will, along with their friends in the larger world of elite media, bear much of the responsibility for this. They are certain that their work is the mission of human liberation from irrational prejudice.
In the most important section of Bruni’s column, he writes: “In an astonishingly brief period of time, this country has experienced a seismic shift in opinion — a profound social and political revolution — when it comes to gay and lesbian people.”
That is a powerful summary of what has happened. Bruni is undoubtedly right, and he has helped to make it so. But there is something missing from Bruni’s analysis, and this is something that he has helped to cause as well. The “seismic shift” on the issue of homosexuality is a profound moral revolution as well.
And yet, what makes this moral revolution so vast in consequences and importance is this: the moral dimension has virtually disappeared from the cultural conversation. This is true, we must note, even among the defenders of heterosexual marriage.
Read the rest of this article »
Tuesday, January 1st, 2013
Matt Barber in the ring.
This column was first published Dec. 28. 2012 in WND.com. Matt Barber is vice president of Liberty Counsel Action, a former professional boxer, and a Board Member of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH). He was also fired by Allstate Insurance Co. in 2005 after writing an online column on his own time critical of the homosexual activist agenda.
“It’s a mixed up muddled up shook up world …” ~ The Kinks
Through the secular-”progressive” looking-glass, the term “sexual orientation” has, in a few short years, evolved to accommodate an ever-expanding fruit basket of carnal appetites.
Mr. Francis enjoys macramé, long walks on the beach, wearing lady’s knickers and showering fully nude with 6-year-old girls.
Because it’s illegal to “discriminate based on the basis of gender identity,” and since it’s the only “tolerant” thing to do, this brave bellwether of the persecuted LGBT victim-class has secured the “civil right” for him and other men to fully expose themselves to your daughter in the locker room at Olympia, Washington’s Evergreen State College.
But slow down, Dad. According to the law, if you have a problem with Mr. Francis baring all to your baby girl, then you’re the problem. You’re a “transphobe” (“homophobia’s” evil twin sister, er, brother … whatever). Deck this sicko for terrifying your first-grader and you’re off to jail while “Colleen” is off to the “Human Rights Campaign” for a commendation as the latest victim of an “anti-LGBT hate crime.”
Rosa Parks in drag, I guess.
Read the rest of this article »
Wednesday, December 12th, 2012
Justice Anthony Kennedy
Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families PAC wrote the following in his “End of Day” newsletter December 10, 2012:
High Court To Decide Meaning Of Marriage
Late Friday afternoon, the Supreme Court announced it would hear arguments in two cases dealing with the meaning of marriage. From the cases selected, it appears as though the justices want to tackle the issue from both the state and federal perspective.
One comes from New York and challenges the constitutionality of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act. The second case stems from a challenge to California’s voter-approved initiative Proposition 8, which defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
It is difficult to predict how the court will rule in either case. Some conservatives are cautiously optimistic about the Proposition 8 case, believing that the justices will find striking down a popularly-enacted law on something as basic as the meaning of marriage to be an affront to the right of self-government and the foundation of our republican form of government.
I’m not holding my breath. The Supreme Court is split with four reliable liberals, four generally conservative justices and one moderate, swing vote — Justice Anthony Kennedy. While Justice Kennedy sided with conservatives in the Obamacare decision, he has a long history of siding with the court’s liberals when it comes to abortion and homosexual rights.
For example, Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in Romer v. Evans, which struck down a popularly-enacted ballot initiative in Colorado preventing special legal protection based solely on homosexual behavior [see text of Colorado Amendment 2 in footnote 2 HERE]. Justice Kennedy also wrote the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down state laws against sodomy.
Read the rest of this article »
Monday, June 6th, 2011
- Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen
UPDATE: Since AFTAH re-aired her Columbus Truth Academy speech, Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen has published a book, “Only One Mommy: A Woman’s Battle for Her Life, Her Daughter, and Her Freedom: The Lisa Miller Story.” It is available through Amazon HERE; go here for Rena’s blog, “Only One Mommy.” Go HERE for Rena’s Facebook page.
The following presentation [click HERE to listen] is excerpted from a speech by Liberty University School of Law Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen was made at the Truth Academy in Columbus, Ohio, April 1-2, 2011 — sponsored jointly by Americans For Truth About Homosexuality and Mission America. We aired Prof. Lindevaldsen’s talk (edited down slightly from the original, without the ‘Q&A’ session) on the “Americans For Truth Hour” radio program May 21, 2011. Lindevaldsen discusses the escalating ”gay” activist campaign to establish homosexuality — and same-sex “marriage” – as a “civil right.” She discusses the growing threat to religious and First Amendment freedoms arising from pro-homosexual court rulings and policies. Lindevaldsen explains how President Obama is undermining the Defense of Marriage Act, and warns that religious liberty will suffer a crushing blow if homosexuals receive favored “suspect class” status in the law. NOTE: All of Prof. Lindevaldsen’t excellent presentations at AFTAH’s Truth Academies are available below:
Order Truth Academy Sets: DVDs of Chicago 2010 or CDs of Columbus 2011 – Rena Lindevaldsen has spoken at both of AFTAH’s Truth Academies. Columbus 2011: A 13-CD AUDIO set of this year’s two-day Truth Academy in Columbus, OH – co-sponsored by Mission America — is available for just $49 postpaid. This 13-CD set includes the full talk above by Prof. Lindevaldsen, as well as presentations by Greg Quinlan, Matt Barber, Linda Harvey, Gary Glenn, Prof. Rob Gagnon, Peter LaBarbera and WorldNetDaily’s David Kupelian. Chicago 2010: A DVD-video set of the entire three-day Truth Academy — featuring two talks by Rena Lindevaldsen — is available for $89 (including postage). Other Chicago speakers include: Robert Knight, Barber, Quinlan, Ryan Sorba, Laurie Higgins, Gagnon, Arthur Goldberg, Cliff Kincaid and AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera. Double order discount: Order BOTH Truth Academy sets (the Chicago DVD-VIDEO and the Columbus CD-AUDIO) for a discount price of $129 (postage included). Send your check and specify your order to AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522; or give online at www.americansfortruth.com/donate/ (please use PayPal if possible). Send queries to americans
HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes. Do not use Real Player. It is not supported and there may be difficulty listening with it. Left click once on the link below to play. (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment or two to load.) OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.
5-21-11, Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen
Tuesday, July 20th, 2010
- The judicial confirmation process has become a spectacle almost as comical as one of Al Franken’s (D-MN) jokes. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan was not grilled on whether she believes Americans have a First Amendment right to oppose homosexuality — i.e., whether their religious and moral liberties are overridden by “sexual orientation” laws.
“Kagan did not deny that her application of Harvard’s ['sexual orientation' nondiscrimination] policy would have excluded the Catholic Church.” –CNSNews.com, reporting on Kagan’s confirmation hearing
By Peter LaBarbera
Solicitor General Elena Kagan has been confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee by a 13-6 vote — after hypocritically dodging and weaving her way through the farce that now masquerades as the judicial confirmation process. Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC) was the lone Republican to vote for her — despite the fact that South Carolina is conservative while Kagan is the ideological cousin of our elitist, far-left president. (Click HERE for the MassResistance report on Kagan’s pro-homosexual record at Harvard.)
Kagan’s future now rests with the Democrat-dominated Senate — where most pundits (betting on listless GOP opposition) expect her to win confirmation; the vote is expected to come in early August.
Americans now face the prospect of a radically pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality social Leftist-for-Life sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court, potentially for 30 or more years. In just 105 days, on Election Day (Nov. 2), U.S. citizens will be able to cripple Barack Obama’s power — a day anticipated by millions of citizens outraged over his arrogant and reckless presidency. In two more years, Obama could be voted out of office a la Jimmy Carter.
Not so with Kagan. Unless Republicans summon up the guts to actually block her via filibuster (don’t bet on it), she likely will soon become Justice Kagan until she retires at an old age. There, if her past is any indication, one day she will vote to create a new “fundamental right” of “same-sex marriage” out of an “evolving” Constitution – all the while protecting that old make-believe “constitutional right,” sacrosanct to liberals, of abortion-on-demand. (See this Omaha World-Herald story on Kagan’s manipulation of expert testimony in the Clinton administration to fight legislative attempts to ban the gruesome practice of partial-birth abortion.)
Read the rest of this article »
Americans for Truth
P.O. Box 5522
Naperville, IL 60567-5522
Want to See Every New AFTAH Article?
If you don't want to miss anything posted on the Americans For Truth website, sign up for our "Feedblitz" service that gives you a daily email of every new article that we post. (This service DOES NOT replace the regular email list.) To sign up for the Feedblitz service, click here.