HOMOSEXUAL HATE: New York City homosexual activist Scott Rose created this nasty, infantile graphic demonizing Parents Action League President Laurie Thompson. The text underneath the graphic — showing feces coming out of her forehead – is Rose’s, and typical of the rest of the tirade on his blog, “AntiGayBigotryScaresMe.” Click on graphic to enlarge.

WARNING: Offensive Language

This is Part Two of my interview [click HERE to listen] with Barb Anderson of Parents Action League and Laurie Higgins of Illinois Family Institute. This discussion was pre-taped in early April and aired April 21, 2012. Note that beginning May 1, the new time for hearing the AFTAH Radio Hour live on WYLL-AM-1160 in Chicagoland is every Saturday at midnight (one hour later than the usual time). Anderson describes the incredibly nasty attacks (see graphic at right) on pro-family advocates concerned about the promotion of homosexual behavior in Anoka-Hennepin schools (outside Minneapolis). She and Higgins discuss how the Southern Poverty Law Center has named Parents Action League a “hate group,” and how a “hit-piece” in Rolling Stone magazine promoted the falsehood that a rash a local youth suicides was tied directly to “anti-gay bullying” (an assertion debunked by Anoka-Hennepin school district officials). Anderson discusses how the school district ultimately settled lawsuits brought by the SPLC and the Obama Administration– which she says will accelerate pro-homosexuality propaganda in schools.

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

4-21-12, Barb Anderson & Laurie Higgins, Part Two

This confused young woman had her healthy breasts surgically removed to appear like the "man" she wants to be. Today's youth are inundated in schools and pop culture with pro-gender-confusion and pro-homosexual messages -- while not being exposed to the downsides of these destructive and immoral lifestyles. Photo: Mass Resistance.

We thank my friend Linda Harvey, founder of Mission America, for her tremendous work on behalf of America’s “LGBT-brainwashed” youth. — Peter LaBarbera.  Linda writes:

By Linda Harvey of Mission America

A broad coalition of pro-family groups recommends that students stay away from school on Friday, April 20, 2012, the national “Day of Silence,” if the school is officially recognizing and/or allowing students and teachers to observe this event during instructional time by a silent protest. High schools and even some middle schools are now the targets of this event.

The Day of Silence is supposedly led by students, but actually led by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which describes itself as “championing LGBT issues in K-12 education since 1990.” Did you catch that– “K through 12”? Younger and younger students are the target of this group. The younger, the better because they are easier to manipulate.

The Day of Silence goal is not, as I am told frequently by outraged emails from misinformed students, to help end all bullying. The goal is to exploit the tender sympathies of kids to promote approval of homosexuality and gender confusion. The agenda is everything; Judeo-Christian morality is the enemy; and sadly, kids are the tools.

GLSEN teaches students that homosexuals and gender-confused people are “silenced” and under persecution by those who object to this behavior, and that traditional moral beliefs cause bullying. No hard, objective data exists to support this contention, and the event itself causes hostility, confusion, and division.

Here are ten reasons I believe Christian students in particular should refuse to honor this event by school attendance and why Christian teachers should plan activities that require students to verbally participate:

1. A silent protest in support of immoral, God-dishonoring behavior is in itself profoundly deceptive. All sexual behavior outside man/woman marriage is sinful in God’s eyes. Why should Christian students and teachers be in the position of accommodating this flagrant violation of their principles? Teachers would not want polyamorous students to be bullied, but would schools permit students to participate in a classroom protest in support of polyamory?

2. Any explicit or implicit message encouraging teens and even younger students to view homosexual acts as normative or moral is not “social justice” or “tolerance,” but, in reality, child corruption.

3. Allowing classroom silence to honor the Day of Silence unleashes tremendous peer pressure for students and even teachers to endorse sexual immorality, or be considered “enemies” of those peers and teachers proudly involved in homosexuality. This puts people of faith in the position of violating Christian doctrine through tacit approval (Romans 16:17-18; Ephesians 5:11). They are also intimidated into self-censorship, which undermines both fundamental First Amendment and educational principles.

4. The Day of Silence fosters hostile and bigoted attitudes toward Christians and others with traditional moral beliefs; spreads inaccurate and harmful information; and promotes unproven, non-factual Leftist moral beliefs as objective truths.

5. Using legitimate concerns about bullying and teen suicide to promote approval of homosexuality in schools is educational malpractice. It’s totally unnecessary to stop bullying and prevent harm to students, and Christians should not be a party to this gross distortion of a genuine problem. No one needs to affirm homosexuality or gender-confusion in order to prevent bullying, but GLSEN routinely takes this deceitful position.

6. Teachers know real bullying when they see it, and most teachers address it. But GLSEN and the Day of Silence pressure teachers not merely to address bullying behavior but to affirm Leftist moral and political beliefs. Since when did it become the job of government employees to become public relations agents for Leftist moral propositions or the good reputation of homosexuality?  Stopping bullying can be accomplished without becoming champions of the non-factual assumptions of the homosexuality-affirming movement.

7. There are legitimate lessons students should learn about prejudice and bias. But Day of Silence promoters deceptively link moral objections about homosexuality to racial discrimination or anti-Semitism in an attempt to legitimize the pro-homosexual ideology and portray homosexuals as perennial victims, while censoring through social pressure all dissenting views.

8. Teachers have used the DOS to inappropriately become classroom advocates and models of this deviant behavior. In one Ohio school, a teacher used a Power Point presentation to tell students about her “gay” support and even disclosed to students that she was a lesbian, without prior parental notification or permission from her principal.

9. The health and lifestyle risks of homosexuality are virtually never shared on the Day of Silence. Instead, students are given the deceitful impression that homosexuality is just as safe and worthy an identity as heterosexual dating and marriage. The notion that same-sex attraction and volitional acts constitute an identity worthy of affirmation is not a fact, and government employees have no right, either explicitly or implicitly, to promote it to other people’s children.

10. The DOS message inhibits Christians from witnessing to their peers caught up in homosexuality or gender confusion. There is salvation through Jesus Christ and the hope of leaving this sin behind. Calling homosexuality a sin on the Day of Silence would be considered “hateful,” when it is actually God-honoring and respectful to the hearer. It may lead them to an eternal home with God. But that won’t happen if the truth is suppressed, which it always is on the Day of Silence. Parents, keep your children home that day. If your children have the courage to witness, they can do it on another day when perhaps they will have a fair chance of being heard.

 

Linda Harvey

Linda Harvey founded Mission:America in 1995, a Christian pro-family organization tracking current cultural issues. The organization’s flagship website is www.missionamerica.com, with weekly e-newsletters transmitted to a national audience.  As a former advertising executive, Mrs. Harvey specialized in creating new communications’ vehicles. She has started more than twenty-five publications and overseen multi-million dollar advertising campaigns, primarily in the health care field. She was formerly Director of Marketing Communications at Ohio State University Hospitals.

Mrs. Harvey has spoken on Capitol Hill and testified numerous times before state legislative committees. She serves on the National Pro-Family Forum and the Ohio Pro-Family Forum.

Linda Harvey holds a B.A. in English from Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, and has done graduate work at both Miami and Ohio State University. She is the wife of Tom Harvey and the mother of two children. They live in Columbus, Ohio.

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

3-3-12, Amy Contrada, Part One

51501. The state board and any governing board shall not adopt any textbooks or other instructional materials for use in the public schools that contain any matter reflecting adversely upon persons on the basis of race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, sexual orientation, or because of a characteristic listed in Section 220.

For more on the other “sexual indoctrination” bills pending in the California legislature, go HERE.

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

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

WARNING: Offensive descriptions and photos of materials that should NOT be promoted to college students 

Books on display at "Leather Library" exhibit hosted and sponsored by University of Chicago. Book at center, "Macho Sluts," combines S&M, incest and pedophilia. Other books promote sadistic perversion and public sex. Photos: Peter LaBarbera; click to enlarge.

[First of several reports on U-Chicago's corruption of students]

TAKE ACTION: Call the University of Chicago at 773-702-1234 and ask for President Robert Zimmer’s Office. [e-mail him at president@uchicago.edu]. Let him know that you are appalled that the Universiity is promoting sexual sadism and deviant pornography – even pedophilia – to its students.  The Chicago Sun-Times reports that U-Chicago could be the first of MANY colleges to host the perverse ”Leather Library” exhibit — but it also could be the last if this academic abuse causes the appropriate controversy. So make your voice heard on this today.

Keep this story alive: Lastly, contact Sun-Times reporter Kara Spak at kspak@suntimes.com [312-321-3000; press #5 twice] and: 1) thank her for doing the story; 2) tell her that most Americans would be outraged to learn of this academic abuse; and 3) urge her to keep following this shocking story of U-Chicago directly promoting S&M to students in the name of “diversity.”

___________________________________

University of Chicago Promotes Sadomasochism and Pedophilia to Students — in the Name of Diversity 

CHICAGO–The University of Chicago provided nearly $3,200 to a “kink” student group for a traveling sadomasochistic “leather library” exhibit at the University that eroticized pedophilia, incest, and the most deviant pornographic perversions known to mankind. 

Americans For Truth about Homosexuality (AFTAH) sent a reporter yesterday to the exhibit – at the University’s International House – and came back with photos of the shockingly perverse offerings of the “Carter Johnson Leather Library,” including: 

• The lesbian porn book “Macho Sluts,” by Pat Califia, which includes a story about a mother who engages in sadistic, violent “sex play” with her own 13-year-old daughter;
• Numerous books celebrating “Master-Slave” relationships;
• “Gay” male pornographic fiction books with pederastic themes, including one 1975 book, “Small Town Boy,” about a 15-year-old boy who meets up with and is sodomized by an adult businessman visiting from New York City;
• Photos and posters depicting the twisted violence and “consensual” degradation and cruelty of S&M – including one of a woman caning her ball-and-chained male ”slave.”

The University of Chicago "leather" exhibit featured dozens of homosexual porn fiction books like this one, "Small Town Boy," about a 15-year-old boy who williingly is sodomized by an adult man visiting from New York City.

Incredibly, the University of Chicago now officially sanctions a “student group” for sexual sadists: RACK (Risk-Aware Consensual Kink), through which the traveling “leather library” exhibit was funded. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, RACK “received nearly $3,200 in university grant money to bring the display to campus.” 

The grant for the “fetish” exhibit came from the “Uncommon Fund,” a $40,000, student-run program that “offers a chance for students to pursue a wide range of ideas that can benefit the campus community and campus life,” a U-Chicago spokesman told the Sun-Times. 

Photo-"art" from the Leather Library shows a woman beating her male "slave," who has a ball-and-chain attached to his ankle. Why would the University of Chicago pay to promote such "sexualized cruelty" to its students?

The sadistic-sex exhibit was free and open to the public, and while AFTAH’s reporter was present, a few young women and men – who appeared to be around 20 – came to view the depraved materials. Exhibit creator Vi Johnson exulted to the Sun-Times: “Being able to bring this display to a college campus, put a 300-year-old book [about deviant sex] in the hands of a 20-year-old and say, ‘Here’s your history’ – it’s such a rush.” 

Just down the street from the International House is the University of Chicago Laboratory School (where Malia and Sasha Obama once attended). Around 3:00 PM Wednesday, as the “Leather Library” exhibit was winding down on its third and final day at the private university, dozens of elementary school children from the Lab School spilled onto the sidewalk. 

Poster advertises conference for bizarre dog-and-master perversion.

Coulter Lounge at University of Chicago's International House, where the "Leather Library" exhibit was hosted for three days.

“There could not have been a more jarring contrast between the innocence of children and the potential corruption that awaits them a mere decade later – at the hands of academic elites brandishing a particularly toxic form of tolerance,” said AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera. “I doubt many U-Chicago parents or alums are aware that U-Chicago is using its funds to expose young men and women to high-risk, vile behaviors – all in the name of ‘diversity.’”

One of hundreds of sadistic-sex books on display at University of Chicago's "Leather Library" exhibit.

:
As the Sun-Times reported, the University of Chicago’s promotion of sexual sadism to youth follows another S&M sex scandal — at Northwestern University, on the north side of Chicago, where, “in February, two non-student fetishists performed a live sex act with a custom designed sex toy in an optional, after-class Human Sexuality seminar.” Read Illinois Family Institute writer Laurie Higgins’ account of it HERE.

Ken Hutcherson

These interviews were recorded April 12, 2011, and aired April 16th [CLICK HERE to listen]. In the first part of the show, Pastor Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, Washington, discusses his new project to rally Christians nationwide in support of DOMA, the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. He launched it after President Obama suddenly announced through his Attorney General that would stop defending in court Section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage in federal law as between a man and a woman. Already Hutcherson is being lambasted by homosexual activists, but he said the response among Christian leaders, including his friend Dr. James Dobson, has been outstanding.  The RealClearPolitics article by Matthew Franck to which AFTAH president Peter LaBarbera refers in the interview is HERE. (Hutcherson did a wonderful three-part interview with AFTAH last year [Click HERE for Part One]; spoke at our banquet in October; and received the 2010 AFTAH ‘Truth-Teller’ Award.) 

Linda Harvey

The second half of the show features Linda Harvey, founder and president of Mission America, which co-sponsored our recent and highly informative Truth Academy in Columbus, Ohio, where she lives. Linda discusses that and the recent story that she broke about the ‘Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook site of GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) containing photos for a pornographic homosexual hook-up site, and photos for other inappropriate websites including a “Gay Thailand Today” site promoting sex tourism. Linda tells how she was informed about the inappropriate GLSEN FB photos by a grandmother and pro-family advocate in New York who came upon them. Incredibly, after AFTAH advanced the Mission America exposé, homosexual bloggers led by Alvin McEwen – an AFTAH-hating extremist with a penchant for twisting facts – began speculating that Americans For Truth might have placed the photos on GLSEN’s Facebook page as a “homophobic smear” to “frame” this homosexual activist organization! Just one more lie from a movement built upon lies… (Linda too has previously been interviewed by AFTAH; click HERE for Part One of her two-part 2010 interview.)  

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,’ which is not supported; there may be difficulty when attempting to listen with it.  Left click once on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment or two to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show. 

4-16-11, Dr. Ken Hutcherson & Linda Harvey

[WARNING: OFFENSIVE AND GRAPHIC CONTENT; NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN]

ORIGINAL PAGE: Above is how the GLSEN "Gay-Straight Alliances" Facebook page appeared as of the afternoon of April 11, 2011 -- before Mission America exposed its pornographic links. Note the three photos for "NEXGAY" -- a pornographic homosexual male hook-up website -- and the photo for "Gay Trip Thailand," a sex-tourism Facebook page. Also, the photo for "Blueprint," a movie about homosexual male lovers distributed by TLA, a "gay" video company that sells homosexual porn videos.

TAKE ACTION: Parents and Guardians: Call your children’s middle or high school and ask if students and/or teachers will be permitted to refuse to speak during class on Friday, April 15 (as part of the annual homosexual activist “Day of Silence”). For more information, go HERE.

_______________________________________________________

By Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

A Facebook page affiliated with the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) — to support homosexual student clubs and GLSEN’s upcoming activist “Day of Silence” in schools nationwide (Friday, April 15) — was linked for several weeks to a pornographic “gay” hook-up website containing full-frontal nudity and personal ads expressing interest in dangerous homosexual practices including anal sodomy, “rimming” and various sadistic sex fetiishes popular in the homosexual male subculture.

The GLSEN ”Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook page was also linked to a  “Gay Trip Thailand” Facebook page with shirtless Thai males — luring men to that notorious sex-tourism destination — as well as a movie about two male lovers that is sponsored by a leading “gay” pornographic video distributor. When the salacious links were exposed April 11 by Mission America, a pro-family group, they were quickly removed from the GLSEN Facebook page.

The pornographic links evidently remained posted on the GLSEN-sponsored Facebook page for weeks. At least one ”photo” ad for the homosexual male hook-up site “NEXGAY” had been posted on the GLSEN Facebook page since at least January 15, 2011, based on a favorable comment  responding to the ad and posted on the GLSEN site that date.  (See  four NEXGAY photo-ads with male models in the lower right corner of the graphic at right.)

NEXGAY profile asks users to indicate their favored anal-sex "Role": choices range from "Bottom/Passive" to "Versatile" to "Top/Active." Homosexual anal sex is a huge risk factor in the continuing high rates of HIV and other STDs among "men who have sex with men." Click to enlarge graphic.

A perusal of the ”NEXGAY” website reveals it as one of many homosexual male “dating” sites — which are not like the typical heterosexual dating sites in that they are filled with vulgar and overtly pornographic references to sex acts, penis size, etc.

In fact, in its profile page where new members give their personal information, NEXGAY asks users to state their “penis size” –offering a pull-down menu with length options ranging from 5 to 27 centimeters; see photo below). Another entry asks whether they prefer ”escorts” (male prostitutes). The hyper-promiscous and often raunchy homosexual male hook-up culture — which includes anonymous sex — is fueled by efficient, online “gay” websites like Manhunt and Grindr — and now ”NEXGAY.”

As can be seen from our screen-shot upper right, a click on the NEXGAY photo on GLSEN’s “Gay Straight Alliances” Facebook page advertised it to their youthful audience as a site offering ”free, unrestricted online dating for gay men.” Yet on the front page of the NEXGAY site, as of today (April 12, 2010), it becomes clear what “unrestricted” means: among a series of thumbnail photos linking to NEXGAY subscribers is one for ”Charly” (see below left), showing him thrusting forward his exposed, erect penis (his face is not shown).

A click on “Charly’s” (from Hammond, Ind.) pornographic thumbnail photo takes the user to his profile page, which describes his “sexual interests” as:  “Anal, Bi/Straight, Bondage, Chat/Cam/Phone, Feet, Kissing, Master/Slave, Nipple play, Oral, Porn, Rimming, Rough, Suits, Toys.” For the unitiated, Bondage, Master/Slave and Rough refer to homosexual sadism/masochism; Feet suggests a foot fetish; anal denotes homosexual anal sex (extremely high risk); while Rimming refers to oral-anal stimulation — a known risk factor for hepatitis because the practitioner’s mouth comes into contact with feces. NEXGAY requires members to be 18 years old.

GLSEN targets younger and younger students

"NEXGAY" web profile photo for "Charly" showed his exposed phallus (covered up here). Charly advertises his "sexual interests" as: "Anal, Bi/Straight, Bondage, Chat/Cam/Phone, Feet, Kissing, Master/Slave, Nipple play, Oral, Porn, Rimming, Rough, Suits, Toys." The link to the pornographic NEXGAY "gay" hook-up site was just one click away from the GLSEN "Gay Straight Alliances" Facebook page.

The Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) is the leading activist group promoting the acceptance of homosexuality, bisexual and transsexuality (transgenderism) in schools. One of the main ways it does that is through “Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs),” which are de facto pro-homosexual booster clubs and which now exist in thousands of high schools and colleges across the United States. GLSEN has always marketed its agenda as protecting the “safety” of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) students — engendering sympathy for its activist work among impressionable youth — but critics question how the promotion of sexual identies tied to unhealthy LGBT behaviors can possibly be termed “safe.” (The CDC, in a recently published 2008 survey from several major cities, reports that nearly one in five  ”men who have sex with men” were infected with the HIV virus, and 44 percent of those did not even know it until they were tested.)

The pro-homosexuality GSA clubs are increasingly making their way into middle schools, where the age range of students is 11-14 or perphaps 15 if the school includes 9th grade. See this San Francisco Unified School District flier on middle school GSAs, from which the following is excerpted:

[Q:] “It makes sense to have a GSA in High School, but why should we have a GSA’s in Middle School?

[A:] “Each year more and more Middle School students are coming out: they and their friends need a safe place to share their experiences and ask questions. In all likelihood, there are also students who have parents or family members who are LGBT.”

We do not have the figures for how many middle schools allow GSAs, but based on the testimonies on GLSEN’s Facebook pages and other homosexual youth venues, it is clear that aggressively “out” homosexuality is on the rise among younger teens and even pre-teens. (Estimates of pro-homosexual student-clubs are unreliable due to their fluid nature, with students graduating and leaving school.)

GLSEN’s history: exposing children to reckless homosexual promiscuity

This latest incident involving a GLSEN link with “gay” porn and the particularly prodigious promiscuity associated with male homosexuality is not the first time GLSEN has been exposed as contradicting its “safety” mantra. Below are a few examples:

• Boston: “Fistgate” — In 2000, at a GLSEN-sponsored youth conference, young teens were guided in a “how-to” discussion — led by homosexual instructors — about the grotesque and dangerous sexual-sadistic practice of “fisting” — in which a man inserts his hand and forearm up the rectum and into the colon of his sex partner; see Mass Resistance story on “Fistgate” HERE;
• Chicago: pornographic advertisements: at the annual GLSEN national conference in 2000, organizers distributed Chicago “gay guides” containing ads for homosexual bathhouses (anonymous sex clubs), gay “leather” (sadomasochist) bars, and homosexual phone sex lines. Similar raunchy advertisements or homosexual “safer sex” fliers reportedly have been distributed at other GLSEN conferences;
• GLSEN’s perverse “Recommended Reading” list of books for high school and adolescent LGBT students include many with overtly sexual themes including one (Rainbow Boys) featuring a sexual encounter between a 17-year-old boy and a 29-year-old man he met on the Internet;
• GLSEN founder Kevin Jennings (appointed by President Obama to be “Safe Schools” deputy at the Department of Education), became the subject of widespread controversy when it was reported that — as a teacher at a Boston-area prep school — Jennings failed to report to authorities when one of his underage male students confessed to him that he had been seduced by a homosexual man. Instead, Jennings used the tragic incident to confirm the boy as “gay.”

Homosexual promiscuity infects youth

NEXGAY profile page asks members to give their "penis size" for prospective sex partners they might hook up with online. This shallow and perverse aspect of homosexual life is rarely discussed in the media. As is shown above, the window containing the measurement choices (5 to 27 cm) comes up on a drop-down menu. Click on photo to enlarge.

Although it receives precious little media coverage, the exposure of youth to the perverted and hyper-promiscuous male homosexual hook-up culture deserves scrutiny — especially with young “men who have sex with men” continuing to have high rates of HIV and other sexual-transmitted diseases.

Surely few Americans are aware of the behaviors and peculiar, twisted carnality of the sex-saturated “gay” male subculture — e.g., the “penis-size” profile category on the NEXGAY website shown at right. Among the other personal profile categories on the NEXGAY site are the following (with options in red):

• Sex: Male; Female; Trans
• [Sexual preference] I am: Gay individual; Bisexual individual; Curious individual; Straight individual; Gay couple; Bisexual couple; Curious couple; Straight couple; Gay group; Curious group; Straight group; an Organization; Other
• [Sodomy position] Role: Top/Active; Top/Vers[atile]; Versatile; Bottom/Vers; Bottom/Passive
• Body hair: None/smooth; Little; Average; Hairy; Shaved; Landscaped [Editor's note: historically, the "gay" slang term "smooth" has been used by adult homosexual men to describe much-sought-after youthful males, who are called "Twinks"];
• Drugs [use drugs?]: Often; Socially; Rarely; Never
• Safe Sex: Always; Discuss; Never
• HIV [status]: Neg; Pos; Unknown
• Escort [sex with male prostitute]: Yes; Discuss; Never
• [Circumcised penis?]  Cut/Uncut: Cut; Uncut

Most adults would be shocked to learn of such detailed catering to and categorizing of perversion — much less teens and even pre-teens who might have reached the site after clicking on the “NEXGAY” ad link off the GLSEN “Gay-Straight Alliances” Facebook page.

‘Charly’s’ past and his future

But there is another aspect to the “NEXGAY”-GLSEN linkage that is symbolic of the tragedy of youth entering the sordid homosexual world. Note these three statements by ”Charly,” the young man from Hammond, Indiana, who posted the pornographic profile on the “gay dating” site. They are among 25 that he listed on his profile page:

My greatest fear is the future.

I am not a great follower of rules and I love risk-taking.

Despite being baptized under Christianity, I do consider myself one, but no one and nothing decides what I believe!

Some time not too long ago Charly lived the innocent and wholesome life of a boy — or so we would hope. Now, at just 23, he is apparently already engaging in — or desires to engage in – some of the most deplorable perversions known to mankind.  We pray that his future would see a return to (real) Christianity — i.e., salvation through Jesus Christ, and deliverance from homosexuality. Charly is responsible for his own conduct, but his descent into the “gay” male hook-up culture — and that of tens of thousands of young men like him — is made easier when society breaks from its biblical moorings and promotes sin and destructive behaviors in the name of tolerance, civil rights, and – worst of all — youth “safety.”

You can reach Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth, at americansfortruth@gmail.com.

_________________________________________________________

More photos and GLSEN”s whitewashed Facebook page:

The webmasters for GLSEN's "GSA" Facebook page quickly removed a photo-ad for sex-tourism in Thailand, called "Gay Trip Thailand" after a pro-family group, Mission America, exposed that and other gay-sex-oriented links on the site.

WHITEWASHED PAGE: GLSEN "GSA" Facebook page stripped of controversial photo-ads: note the absense of the NEXGAY ads, the "Gay Trip Thailand," and the photo advertising the movie "Blueprint" in this cleaned-up version.

Above is the photo for "Gay Trip Thailand" that appeared on GLSEN's "Gay-Straight Alliance" Facebook page before it was yanked on April 11. Click to enlarge. At bottom is cover for homosexual-themed movie "Blueprint" promoted on the GLSEN "GSA" Facebook page. This cover did not appear on the GLSEN site but rather another photo that linked to website about the movie. "Blueprint" is available for view on the website of "TLA," a large distributor of homosexual pornographic videos.

]]> http://americansfortruth.com/2011/04/12/breaking-homosexual-glsen-day-of-silence-facebook-page-linked-to-pornographic-gay-male-hook-up-site/feed/ 0 http://americansfortruth.com/2011/03/28/illinois-high-school-allows-display-celebrating-homosexual-civil-unions-law/ http://americansfortruth.com/2011/03/28/illinois-high-school-allows-display-celebrating-homosexual-civil-unions-law/#comments Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:36:42 +0000 Peterlab http://americansfortruth.com/?p=8978

Display prominently celebrating new Illinois "Civil Unions" law put up by a pro-homosexual student club at Lyons Township High School. Photo: Earl Gough. Click on photo to enlarge.

Dear Readers, each pro-homosexual law makes it easier for school administrators and teachers to allow the one-sided promotion of homosexuality in their school, as occurred recently at Lyons Township High School in LaGrange, Illinois (see photo). The state’s Democrat-dominated General Assembly passed a “Civil Unions” bill in a lame-duck session last year (before a new elected, more conservative legislature could take office) — and Gov. Pat Quinn (D) signed it into law January 31. (The bill, which also allows heterosexual “civil unions,” thus further undermining marriage, takes effect June 1.)

America’s public schools are becoming de facto “Homosexuality-Promotion Zones” — directly undermining the authority of parents to guide their children’s moral upbringing — and subjecting Christian and moral-minded students to one-sided pro-homosexuality propaganda like the above. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org; [Send news about your children's or local schools to americansfortruth@gmail.com.]

Illinois pro-family advocate Earl Gough writes March 7, 2011:

This is one of the reasons my kids no longer attend Lyons Township High School (LTHS) in LaGrange and Western Springs [Illinois].  This and much worse happens there because parents are not involved enough and (sorry) churches do even less.

I was at the South Campus this evening and found this large display (see photo at right) applauding Civil Unions at the front entry of LTHS.

There are 17 suburbs and 25 feeder schools that send their children to this school.  Imagine what influence parents would have if they cared to get involved.  But, because less than 2% (not 10%) of the population is more consistent in pressing this agenda, all of our kids, the majority, have to be subjected to this family-threatening political correctness that is not healthy or in the interest of the general welfare.

Perhaps, with upcoming school board elections [April 5, 2011], this may be good time to discuss this in the public square.  Remember the frog in the kettle?

Earl Gough

Illinois Citizens for Excellence in Education
Brookfield, IL

News Release

March 10, 2011; contact: Peter LaBarbera: 630-717-7631; americansfortruth@gmail.com

LaBarbera: Schools Can Stop Bullying without Promoting Homosexuality or Gender Confusion

[NOTE: This is a corrected version of a similar news release sent out earlier today.]

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (www.aftah.org), warned that a White House “Bullying Prevention Summit” today may promote a pro-homosexuality agenda in schools in the guise of stopping cruelty between students.

“Schools administrators and teachers must ensure a safe and protective learning environment for all students, but they can do so without injecting divisive ‘sexual orientation’ and radical ‘transgender’ politics into the classroom,” LaBarbera said. “There is a real danger that ‘anti-bullying’ policies will be used to curtail any speech in schools critical of homosexuality, and create curricula that discriminate against religious students who believe homosexual behavior is morally wrong.”

President Obama has invited pro-homosexual activists from GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) and other pro-LGBT groups to the summit.

LaBarbera also opposes a federal bill, the Safe Schools Improvement Act (SSIA)—supported by Senate Democrats and lone Republican Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) – as “a Trojan Horse that would push politically correct agendas about homosexuality and ‘transgenderism’ in schools in the name of stopping bullying.”

LaBarbera said a key anti-bullying watchdog – BullyPolice.org – specifically recommends AGAINST “defining victims” in bullying legislation: “Defining victims will slow the process of lawmaking, dividing political parties who will argue over which victims get special rights over other victims,” states a BullyPolice document suggesting a model anti-bullying law.

Interestingly, the pro-homosexual Keen News Service reports that the proposed federal anti-bullying bill goes further than most state anti-bullying bills:

“A federal law could help students even though states have been passing their own anti-bullying laws, said Kara Suffredini, executive director of Mass Equality, the leading LGBT advocacy organization in Massachusetts. The SSIA [Safe Schools Improvement Act], she said, goes further than most state laws in providing a specific enforcement mechanism—the withholding of funds. It also goes further than most states, including Massachusetts, in its reporting requirements and in prohibiting bullying based upon specific, enumerated characteristics, such as sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Yet another pro-homosexual bill, the re-introduced Student Non-discrimination Act (SNDA), also has the potential to create an intrusive federal bureaucracy that will pressure schools to either enact pro-“gay” programs or lose federal funding. Keen reports: 

“SNDA states that elementary and secondary schools must not discriminate against students on the basis of real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity in any program or activity receiving federal funds, or they will risk losing those funds. ‘Discrimination,’ under SNDA, includes harassment, bullying, intimidation, and violence based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”

A third bill, the Tyler Clementi Higher Education Anti-Harassment Act, “establishes similar anti-bullying requirements for colleges and universities receiving federal student aid.” It is named after a Rutgers student who committed suicide last year after being videotaped in a homo-sexual situation with another man.

LaBarbera said the homosexual and “transgender“ activist components in each of the bills are unnecessary:

“Schools can and must protect EVERY child – including those confused about their sexual or gender identity. But they must never use ‘bullying prevention’ to engage in one-sided advocacy about homosexuality, thereby discriminating against Christian, Jewish and Muslim students who believe homosexual practice is wrong.”

__________________________________________________

AFTAH is joining Mission America April 1-2 in Columbus, OH to co-sponsor an educational  “Truth Academy” on how to respond to the aggressive homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda; the theme is: “The Hate Labeling of Christians: Why it’s Happening and What We Can Do.” Details HERE.

Barb Anderson of the Minnesota Family Council

Part Three of our interview with Barb Anderson of the Minnesota Family Council [click HERE to listen]. This segment was pre-taped and aired Saturday, Dec. 18, 2010. Anderson discusses the pro-homosexual propaganda fed to teachers through pro-LGBT seminars and workshops — which is then translated into biased, pro-”gay” education programs in schools. Anderson agrees with AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera that liberal educators do not want parents to know about the radically pro-homosexual lesson programs that they are foisting on impressionable students in the name of “diversity.” She also comments on the politics of “bullying.” To listen to Part One of the interview, go HERE; for Part Two, go HERE. 

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file.  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. 

12-18-10, Barb Anderson, All

Part Two of my interview with Barb Anderson of the Minnesota Family Council [listen HERE]. This was pre-taped and aired December 4, 2010. Anderson discusses how comprehensive sex-ed teaches the “how-to’s” of sex in a valueless vacuum, rather than guiding students on how and why to be abstinent until marriage. And due to the ideology of “inclusion,” dangerous practices like anal sex and “rimming” (mouth-anus “sex”) are specifically mentioned in some public sex-ed curriculum. “Rimming” is a repulsive act practiced by many homosexuals, and now by some perverted heterosexuals; you won’t believe this pornographic Wikipedia entry on it [Warning: highly offensive and graphic; Wikipedia is widely used by young students]. Insanely, children are being taught on how to practice this “safely.” It is astonishing that America went from teaching children the Bible in government schools to now instructing them about various disease-producing perversions — to be practiced in heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or transgended relationships (with no judgments allowed as to which is normal or superior). And then we wonder why America is sliding downhill morally. Part Three of the Anderson interview will air Dec. 18 due to a scheduling delay. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file.  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. 

12-4-10, Barb Anderson, All

The SPLC's Mark Potok oversees the organization's de facto "campaign of defamation" painting groups like AFTAH that oppose homosexuality as "hate groups." Potok admits that the SPLC has never identified a single "gay" group as hateful even though militant homosexual organizations like ACT UP and Bash Back! have targeted churches with vicious attacks.

TAKE ACTION: Contact the Senate Judiciary Committee (members listed HERE; Senate Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121) — and the House Committee on Homeland Security (202-226-2616; members listed HERE; House Switchboard: 202-225-3121) and urge them to investigate the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) working relationship with the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. The leftist SPLC is now slandering conservative, Christian and Tea Party groups by mislabeling them as “hate groups” on a par with genuine, fringe hate groups like the KKK.  American taxpayers should insist that the federal government have no role in legitimizing the SPLC, which has politicized “hate” and turned it into a fund-raising business to demonize conservatives – including mainstream pro-family groups that oppose homosexual activism. To read an in-depth report exposing the SPLC’s unethical practices, go HERE.

_______________________________________________

Below is a useful article by Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute — on the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) preposterous smear-job against mainstream pro-family groups (including AFTAH, IFI, Family Research Council, and AFA) as “hate groups” because we oppose homosexuality and LGBT (“gay”) activism. Technically, the SPLC would argue that AFTAH and the other groups opposed homosexuality in the wrong way, but let’s be honest: ideologically speaking, the SPLC is so deeply committed to pro-”gay” advocacy that it considers suspect any organization that opposes pro-LGBT activism. Predictably, the left-wing, pro-homosexual echo chamber is using the SPLC’s “findings” to discredit pro-family groups.

Indicative of the SPLC”s tendentious and polemical “hate reporting” is its description of this writer as a “longtime gay-basher.” Using such semantics, that would make SPLC staffers like Mark Potok “longtime Christian bashers.” To read an excellent set of reports on the SPLC’s escalating “campaign of defamation” against conservatives and traditionalists, read this special Social Contract Journal edition.

As Barb Anderson of the (potential future “hate” group?) Minnesota Family Council and I discussed in Part One of our AFTAH Radio Hour interview [click HERE to listen], the SPLC’s cynical “hate” dragnet is growing so wide that we have almost reached the point where if a pro-family group is NOT INCLUDED on the SPLC’s “hate” list, it must be slacking off in resisting the destructive homosexual agenda. I write “almost” because some of our good friends such as Liberty Counsel and Campaign for California Families have not yet officially been designated “haters”; their time will come. Of course, the truth is, nobody “hates” like the American Left — especially militant homosexual activists.

I like Laurie’s reference to the “Morality Police”; how ironic that the Left has become the mirror of what it hates:  the societal “moral” scold. Remember that the dogmatists on the Left once screamed against the “Religious Right”: “Don’t impose your morality on the rest of us!” Now it’s the pro-”queer” Left that works diligently to “impose its immorality” on America using every dirty tactic ever conceived by Saul Alinsky (e.g., “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it”; see this piece). I half expect Potok or SPLC co-founder Morris Dees to show up in Wheeling, West Virginia, claiming to “have in my hand the names of 57 newly designated anti-gay hate groups….”

Prior to Americans for Truth About Homosexuality’s “graduation” to full-fledged SPLC “hate” group, we were labeled a “hate” website by the SPLC — after a very… well, bigoted and hateful Marxist homosexual organization, the Gay Liberation Network (GLN), “reported” us to the Alabama-based SPLC. (You know those Communists are all about love, tolerance and honesty … one GLN leader, Bob Schwartz, a self-described Trotskyite, told me at a Chicago protest that he’d push me into oncoming traffic if it weren’t for the cops standing nearby; Schwartz has never denied making the threatening remark. I hereby report the GLN to the SPLC as a “hate” group for targeting sincere Christians with its slanderous and bigoted vilifications and protests.)

No hateful homosexuals?

You will recall that earlier this year SPLC Intelligence Project director Mark Potok confirmed to me via e-mail that no “gay” advocacy group has ever made the SPLC’s “hate” list — despite the fact that miltant homosexual organizations like ACT UP (AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power) have engaged in numerous planned assaults against churches and other political opponents. (In 1989, as part of a huge protest againset then-Cardinal John O’Connor, ACT UP members stormed St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City during a Sunday mass; it was a particularly ugly, anti-Catholic attack in which protesters screamed and tossed condoms in the air, and even stomped on a consecrated wafer believed by Catholics to be the Body of Christ. More recently, in 2008, the homosexual activist group Bash Back! staged an invasion of a large evangelical church in Lansing, Michigan; the church was specifically targeted for its outspoken belief that homosexual practice is sinful and that “gays” can leave that lifestyle through faith in Jesus Christ. [Regarding that point and the SPLC's #10 "myth" below, we must ask: does the Southern Poverty Law Center "hate" former homosexuals?] A thorough investigation into the pro-homosexual “hatred” unleashed against Prop 8 supporters in California – especially churches — is in order.)

In the ensuing months since I corresponded with Potok, the SPLC appears not to have made even a token move to identify homosexual activist hate groups and websites (gay activist Dan Savage’s shockingly evil “Santorum.com” comes to mind [Warning: highly offensive content] — while it greatly expanded its list of alleged pro-family alleged “hate groups.” This contradiction alone demonstrates the SPLC’s extreme bias and the folly of taking seriously its self-appointed role as an objective, impartial hate-monitoring organization.

Higgins deftly exposes the shoddy “research”  of the SPLC (as we at AFTAH have personally experienced; the incompetent researchers for SPLC’s “Intelligence Report” initially confused me with Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute). All this would be comical except that the SPLC is taken seriously by the liberal media and is used as an informational resource by the federal government’s Department of Homeland Security, so please take the action steps above.

Always remember: defending biblical morality is not ”bigotry” and disagreeing with homosexual activists is not “hate.” Thanks for standing with AFTAH for truth amidst all the politically correct lies. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org; write us at americansfortruth@gmail.com

Laurie Higgins writes:
_____________________________________________________

The Morality Police at the Southern Poverty Law Center

Evelyn Schlatter, Southern Poverty Law Center author of "hate groups" article

By Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute

Oh, for the good old days when the term “hate group” referred to groups that actually hated someone. Now the term “hate group” refers to any group that expresses political, philosophical, moral, or theological beliefs with which the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) disagrees.

Last week, the SPLC released the winter issue of Mark Potok’s ironically named “Intelligence Report.” The article, “18 Anti-Gay Groups and Their Propaganda,” by Evelyn Schlatter lists 18 organizations as “anti-gay” groups with 13 of those to be added to their formal list of “hate groups.” The American Family Association, Family Research Council, and the Illinois Family Institute are three of the 13 that will be included on a list with neo-Nazi organizations.

Schlatter explains that the “propagation” of “known falsehoods” about homosexuality will result in organizations being included on the SPLC’s “anti-gay” list and perhaps also their “hate groups” list. Here are the “known falsehoods” that she and co-author Robert Steinback cite in the companion article “10 Anti-Gay Myths Debunked”:

1. If an organization claims that homosexuals “molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
2. If an organization says that “same-sex parents harm children,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
3. If an organization claims that “people become homosexual because they were sexually abused as children or there was a deficiency in sex-role modeling by their parents,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
4. If an organization claims that “homosexuals don’t live nearly as long as heterosexuals,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
5. If an organization claims that “homosexuals controlled the Nazi Party and helped to orchestrate the Holocaust,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate-groups” list.
6. If an organization claims that “hate crime laws will lead to the jailing of pastors who criticize homosexuality and the legalization of practices like bestiality and necrophilia,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
7. If an organization claims that “allowing homosexuals to serve openly would damage the armed forces,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
8. If an organization claims that homosexuals “are more prone to be mentally ill and to abuse drugs and alcohol,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
9. If an organization claims that “no one is born a homosexual,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.
10. If an organization claims “Gay people can choose to leave homosexuality,” it goes on the SPLC’s “hate groups” list.

Under each of these “myths,” Schlatter and Steinback offer analyses and evidence of such poor quality that their arguments wouldn’t pass muster in many high school English classes in which there are actual standards for logic and use of evidence. I will examine just a few of the many problems in their analyses, which in turn will reveal the intellectual and ethical vacuity that pervades the SPLC.

Same sex parents harm children

The SPLC thinks that the belief that same sex parents harm children constitutes hatred. The first problem is that Schlatter and Steinback fail to define harm. If one believes that homosexuality is morally flawed, then a household centered on a morally flawed relationship cannot be beneficial.

It is entirely possible that a brother and sister in an incestuous relationship or that polyamorist parents could raise children, providing for their physical needs, comforting them, and teaching them their ABCs. But most of society believes that such relationships would harm children because they would teach children that incest or polyamory are morally permissible. Would Schlatter and Steinback include organizations on their “hate groups” list that propagate the belief that incestuous parents or poly-parents harm children?

The SPLC and many homosexuals are outraged over any comparison of homosexuality to adult consensual incest or polyamory because they view homosexuality as moral and incest and polyamory as immoral. But no one is obligated to accept the SPLC’s flawed comparison of homosexuality to race or to accept their moral assumptions. After all, who is the SPLC to impose their moral views on all of society? Why are IFI’s moral beliefs about homosexual acts hateful and the views of those who oppose incest or polyamory legitimate? Why do IFI’s moral beliefs about volitional homosexual acts land us on the “hate groups” list, while the moral beliefs of those who oppose incestuous parents or poly-parents do not land them on the “hate groups” list?

Homosexual parents teach their children that gender is irrelevant to marriage and to parenting. They teach them that homosexual acts are inherently moral. And they deliberately deprive children of either a mother or a father. Those corruptions of truth and essential human relationships harm children.

Childhood molestation, innateness (“born that way”) and homosexuality

The one point about which many on both sides of the homosexuality debate agree is that the causes of same-sex attraction are not known. Many believe that same-sex attractions result from a complex interaction of biologically shaped predispositions and environmental factors. If we do notknow the causes of same-sex attraction, and if some of the factors that contribute to it are environmental experiences, how can anyone declare that childhood molestation never contributes to the development of same-sex attraction? And if childhood molestation may contribute in some cases to the development of same-sex attraction, how can it constitute hatred to say so?

Oprah, an inveterate promoter of all things homosexual, recently did two powerful programs about men who were molested as children. One of her guests was a therapist who has treated hundreds of men who were molested as children. He stated that one result of the sexual molestation of boys is “sexual orientation confusion.”

Schlatter and Steinback also assert that it’s hateful, false, and mythical to say “no one is born homosexual,” and then virtually their entire analysis reveals that there is no research proving that people are “born homosexual.” Schlatter and Steinback write, “a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces.”

Following their repeated assertions that there is no proof that homosexuality is congenital, Schlatter and Steinback suggest the false dichotomy that if people do not choose their same-sex attraction, they must be “born that way,” completely ignoring two essential truths. First, the fact that people do not choose their feelings does not mean that such feelings are biologically determined. Second, freely chosen behaviors that emerge from feelings shaped by biological influences are not automatically moral.

IFI has consistently said that although no one chooses their feelings, people do choose how to respond to them. Saying that people ought not to act upon same-sex attraction is no more hateful than saying that people ought not to act upon unchosen, powerful, persistent attractions to pornography, multiple people, or their siblings. All moral beings have to decide which of their unchosen, powerful feelings are morally legitimate to act upon.

Homosexual men and shortened life spans

Under the “myth” about the shortened life spans of homosexual men, Schlatter and Steinback made the following statement:

Bob Unruh, a conservative Christian journalist who left The Associated Press in 2006 for the right-wing, conspiracist news site WorldNetDaily, said shortly before the federal law was passed that it would legalize “all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or ‘paraphilias’ listed by the American Psychiatric Association.” This claim was repeated by many anti-gay organizations, including the Illinois Family Institute.

Either because of Schlatter’s and Steinback’s poor research or lack of ethics, they failed to include the fact that exactly one week after making the error regarding the DSM, writer Kathy Valente posted a correction which is still on our website. It reads as follows:

In the article entitled “Hate Crimes Bill Moves to Senate” (5/5/09), we mistakenly stated that the American Psychiatric Association’s actual definition of “sexual orientation” includes paraphilias. The APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) classifies “sexual orientation” as heterosexual, homosexual, and bi-sexual. The 547 mental disorders called paraphilias specifically involve non-human objects, physical pain, or unwilling partners as in pedophilia. IFI apologizes for the error.

I hope and assume that Schlatter and Steinback will demonstrate the integrity and professionalism that Ms. Valente did by publishing a correction and apology.

In their argument that talking about the shorter life spans of homosexual men constitutes an act of hatred, Schlatter and Steinback focused on research by Paul Cameron, while completely ignoring research by the well-respected International Journal of Epidemiology that found the following:

[W]e demonstrated that in a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 21 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continued, we estimated that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years would not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre were experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by men in Canada in the year 1871.

The authors of this article, upset that conservative groups disseminated this troubling fact, issued an update that said, “if we were to repeat this analysis today the life expectancy of gay and bisexual men would be greatly improved. Deaths from HIV infection have declined dramatically in this population since 1996.”

Though mortality rates have dropped due to improved treatment protocols, HIV infection rates for “men who have sex with men” (MSM) are soaring. According to the CDC, “While CDC estimates that MSM account for just 4 percent of the U.S. male population aged 13 and older, the rate of new HIV diagnoses among MSM in the U.S. is more than 44 times that of other men.”

I wonder if Schlatter and Steinback are planning on publishing an addendum to their article in which they address HIV infection rates for homosexual men, or perhaps they’re going to include the CDC on their “hate groups” list.

Nazism

Schlatter claimed erroneously that I “compared homosexuality to Nazism,” which makes me wonder if she even bothered to read the articles in which I referred to Nazism. Here’s an excerpt from one:

Although genocide and homosexual acts are both sins, in man’s economy–and my own belief system–genocide is a far greater sin. And although I believe that all sin represents rebellion against God, I believe that homosexuality and genocide are by nature distinct….I never posited that homosexuals were the moral equivalents of Nazis. Rather, I compared the rationalizations church leaders offered for the silence of the church in the face of the evil of Nazism to the rationalizations church leaders offer for the silence of the church in the face of the evil of using public schools to promulgate destructive, erroneous views of homosexuality….The feckless or deceitful claim that I said homosexuals are equivalent to Nazis makes no more sense than claiming that someone who says the church should address both the sin of murder and the sin of gossip are saying that murderers and gossips are morally equivalent.

Sin in the closet

The SPLC believes it’s an act of hate to say that homosexuality should remain in the “in the closet.” Ms. Schlatter quoted an article in which I said, “There was something profoundly good for society about the prior stigmatization of homosexual practice…. [W]hen homosexuals were ‘in the closet,’ (along with fornicators, polyamorists, cross-dressers, and ‘transsexuals’), they weren’t acquiring and raising children.”

Many people believe that immoral behavior should be concealed from the public rather than paraded about or publicly celebrated. For example, many people–perhaps most–do not want polyamorists’ or cross-dressers’ behavior to be public where children can see it. Does the SPLC view those who don’t want their children to see manifestations of polyamory or cross-dressing as haters?

And many people believe that children have a fundamental right to be raised by the biological parents who procreated them. Many people, including Roman Catholics, Muslims, Orthodox Jews, and Protestants as well as people who follow no faith tradition, believe it is immoral for homosexuals to adopt or use in vitro fertilization and surrogacy to acquire children. Do they all deserve to be labeled “haters”?

My belief that it would be better for society if homosexuality were not publicly affirmed, normalized, or celebrated no more constitutes hatred of homosexuals than does other people’s belief that polyamory should not be publicly affirmed, celebrated, or normalized constitute hatred of polyamorists.

Ex-gays

The SPLC states that saying people can choose not to act on same-sex attraction or that they can leave a homosexual lifestyle constitutes hatred of homosexuals. Following that logic, what does it mean when someone says people can leave a polyamorous lifestyle or that they can choose not to act on their powerful attractions to multiple people? And what does it say to the hundreds of men and women who have abandoned their homosexual lives that the SPLC says discussing such a path is an act of hatred?

Conclusion

No longer is hate defined as, well, hatred. Anyone who finds the SPLC’s analogies faulty; their research selective; their concealing of inconvenient facts troubling; or their unproven, non-factual moral beliefs wrong, is now guilty of hatred.

The SPLC holds the unproven, non-factual belief that homosexuality is moral and arrogantly demands that all of society agree, or be silent, or be labeled a “hate group.” That strikes me as a strange manifestation of tolerance or respect for speech rights and diversity. Ironically, the SPLC has become the oppressor.

The SPLC hopes that their smear campaign will silence conservatives so that only the SPLC’s moral views will be heard in the public square. No one should allow the unprincipled bullying tactics and specious reasoning of the SPLC to intimidate them into silence. The SPLC’s ontological and moral beliefs about homosexuality are not facts, and dissent from the ethically impoverished SPLC’s beliefs does not constitute hatred.

Please take time to read this comprehensive indictment of the SPLC from the Social Contract Journal, which dedicated its spring 2010 issue to exposing the SPLC.

And if that’s not enough, click HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.

Why doesn't the media -- or the SPLC -- call homosexual activist Dan Savage a "hater" given his history of hate-filled attacks against Christians?

This interview [click HERE to listen] with Barbara Anderson of the Minnesota Family Council aired Nov. 27, 2010. Anderson is a writer and researcher for the MFC specializing in education issues. Here she discusses some of the incredible abuses that have gone in the name of education – including teaching young children about anal sex and other homosexual practices in the name of being “inclusive.” Americans For Truth President Peter LaBarbera and Anderson discuss the privileged role that the liberal group SIECUS (Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S.) plays in American sex education — while the vast majority of parents remain ignorant of SIECUS’ radical agenda. We’re not going to give it away: you simply have to listen to this interview to believe the incredible things that are being taught to kids in the name of safety, diversity and tolerance. This is the first of three interviews.  

In the opening monologue, LaBarbera discusses an incredibly hateful stunt done several years ago by homosexual activist Dan Savage against Pennsylvania’s Republican former U.S. Senator, Rick Santorum. The discussion on “Savage Hate” is in the context of AFTAH now “officially” being labelled a “hate group” by the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center. Savage created an obscene definition for “Santorum”  — a gross byproduct of anal sex – and then set up a website with that creation, Santorum.com [Warning: graphic content].  Anderson says Savage’s deviant definition “truly is a reflection of the kind of perverted thinking of these people … They are not only trying to silence the opposition; they are trying to destroy the opposition.”  LaBarbera asks why the likes of Savage “aren’t ever called haters by the media?”  

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file.  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. 

11-27-10, Barb Anderson, All

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

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

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

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

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

It’s hard not to despise the liberal media when they behave like NBC’s Matt Lauer did in this Oct. 11, 2010 Today Show segment – scolding interviewing Republican New York gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino, who went off the Politically Correct reservation while speaking at an Orthodox Jewish gathering. Sorry to break it to you, Matt, but most parents would not bring their children to a “Gay Pride” parade — especially if they knew what actually goes on there. (Over the years I have witnessed open nudity at several homosexual “pride” parade, and a sickening homosexual sex act that was allowed to go on in the street right in front of a row of cops at a Chicago “pride” parade.)

And no, Matt, homosexuality is not equal to normalcy. (I wish a few politicians had the guts to say so, even when the liberal PC Enforcers like Lauer come after them.) I wonder: what drives straight liberals like Lauer and Jon Stewart to be so obsessed with promoting homosexuality? The modern American liberal has a religious-like devotion to normalizing sexual perversion — why? Since when did Affirming Homosexuality become so sacrosanct? – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

_________________________________

Media exploits University tragedy

Editorial
By The Daily Targum
Published: Tuesday, October 5, 2010

The death of University student Tyler Clementi might have been properly mourned if it were not for the massive rallies and aggressive news coverage that altered the nature of the situation. The truth is that an 18-year-old boy killed himself – he was a student just like the rest of us, someone just trying to receive an education. Yet people’s relentless agendas took his death and turned it into a cause based on false pretenses.

A crowd of more than 20 people ended up lying outside the entrance of the Rutgers Student Center on the College Avenue campus the first night of the news breaking. The chants were, “We’re here. We’re queer. We want safety in our homes.” The mistake was that Clementi’s death should not have been turned into a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender protest for gay rights and safe spaces at the University. Robert O’Brien, Department of Anthropology assistant instructor, led the rally as he chanted, “Not safe in dorms, not safe at Rutgers.” Essentially, an angry mob fending for their rights turned the death of a young boy into a cause for “safe spaces” for gays across the University – all the while, these spaces already existed. We have groups across campus that deal with students’ psychological difficulties – 17 Seconds is one that deals with suicides – as well as groups that address their sexual orientation. We have these spaces, and the University community is diverse enough to provide students with whatever it is they need.

The focal point of Clementi’s tragic death should have been a boy’s inability to deal with the hardships of life. And yet the news and certain organizations picked this up and carried it into the ranks of general causes for major social groups – for their profit. Did Tyler really feel unsafe after all? Do we know the reason behind his suicide? Do we know if he, himself, would take part in the movement behind his death – the push for safe spaces?

It is disappointing that everyone from news to celebrities picked up the story. Actress Brittany Snow and actor Neil Patrick-Harris are just two of the many celebrities belittling Clementi’s death – forcing his remembrance into a cause rather than a proper mourning.

We did not know Tyler. It was barely three weeks into his first year at the University, and most of his neighbors in his residence hall barely knew him. Turning his death into a push for gay rights is a fallacy. Homosexuality is not the only reason for which people kill themselves. In this case, it might have pushed Clementi over the edge, but the fact that he was gay should by no means turn his death into a march for safe spaces. These groups want to be heard. They want the attention. They want their agendas to shine in the limelight.

Instead, we should address that the signs of a suicidal 18-year-old kid were unseen and went unnoticed, not “We want safety in our homes.” We have the safety, or as much of it as we together as a University community can in today’s world. What we need is to notice those of us who need help and help them. Entertainers stay away. O’Brien leave the issue alone. Let us – family, friends and the University together – mourn for Clementi, and just for him, rather than using him as a martyr for a cause that has yet to be proven.

EDUCATE YOURSELF: Read the awful Proposition 8 decision by homosexual Judge Vaughn Walker HERE, and read about how New Mexico Christian photographer Elaine Huguenin was victimized by lesbian activists HERE.

By Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Below is a YouTube of Glenn Beck’s recent appearance on FOX News’ Bill O’Reilly’s show — in the wake of a judge striking down Prop 8 in California as unconstitutional. Beck dismissed homosexual “marriage” as not being a serious national threat to America [our response to Beck follows the video and the jump]:

Here are some reasons why Glenn Beck is not just wrong — but has it completely backwards regarding the escalating threat that homosexual activism, culminating in court-imposed “gay marriage,” poses to America’s children and our First Amendment liberties:

1) Just as reported homosexual Judge Vaughn Walker overruled the expressed will of California voters (twice expressed) against “same-sex marriage,” federalized homosexual “marriage” would override the documented will of the people in the 31 states that have already voted — some by huge margins — to preserve marriage in the law as what it is: between one man and one woman.

2) Legalized homosexual “marriage” will force businessmen and -women to subsidize homosexual relationships even if they rightly believe that those relationships are immoral and deviant. That is un-American, anti-freedom, and just plain wrong. A businessman who provides marital benefits to his employees could not choose which “marriages” (normal or counterfeit-”gay”) merit company support and which do not — even if he strongly disagrees with homosexual ‘unions’ as a violation of the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God, to quote our Declaration of Independence. If the business owner denied benefits only to “same-sex married” employees, it would invite a lawsuit. You cannot be free and simultaneously forced by the State to use your hard-earned money to reward people practicing bad behavior.

3) Legalized homosexual “marriage” paves the way for even greater pro-homosexuality indoctrination in the nation’s schools than we are already seeing under the mandate of ”sexual orientation nondiscrimination.” Wherever marriage and “civil rights” are taught, homosexual “marriage” would have to be validated because it would be the law of the land (or the individual state). Say Johnny Pupil, a first-grader, asks his teacher: “When I grow up, could I marry a man or a woman?” The teacher — if honoring the State’s newfound “constitutional right” (and so as not to be accused of discrimination) — would have to answer “Either one, Johnny.” Corrupting children’s innocence and redefining morality in the name of “tolerance” and newfangled “rights” directly undermines parental authority. It also turns America’s schools into Pro-Homosexual Propaganda Centers – an evil on a par with legalizing the killing of innocent, unborn children in the womb in the name of “choice” and “reproductive rights.”

4) And let’s not forget homosexual-”married” teachers. If “gay marriage” is legalized, public school parents would be barred from preventing proudly partnered homosexuals from teaching their kids. (And there could be lawsuits against private schools by homosexual teachers suing for marital discrimination.) Picture a lesbian teacher putting the photo of her and her female parter — or maybe the celebratory photo of them kissing after their “marriage” ceremony — on her desk in front of the class. Teachers are important role models for our children – and all across the country, they talk about their married and family life with their students. However, if all “marriages” are equal, whatever is OK for normally-married teachers to do could not be challenged when perversely-”married” homosexual teachers do the same thing. Hence legal “gay marriage” would be used to normalize homosexual relationships to children.

5) In homosexual-”marriage” states, school textbooks will be re-written to validate homosexual “marriages” as the real deal — and the winning “gay marriage” would be portrayed as a genuine civil rights achievement. Thus, not only will impressionable minds be corrupted by propaganda that falsely affirms that sexual perversion and marriage are compatible, they will also be taught that to oppose this concept is to stand against “civil rights.” Christians must not be naive on this point: even very young students would be taught that those who fought the “gay” civil rights movement — culminating in its greatest prize, “marriage equality” — are the modern-day equivalents of Americans who fought against racial reconciliation and true civil rights. (Interestingly, polls show that African Americans oppose homosexual “marriage” by wider margins than whites.) The law is a teacher and unfortunately the lesson here is that Americans of faith who agree with God against homosexual “marriage” are small-minded, intolerant bigots who “hate gay people.” That misguided ”lesson” will be drilled into young minds in the name of tolerance.

6) This is perhaps the most sinister by-product of legalizing homosexual “marriage”: it becomes a very effective and practical tool in the further demonization and denigration of traditional religion in the USA. If the struggle for homosexual “marriage” (“gay civil rights”) is a noble one — and predominantly religiously-motivated opponents are somehow the modern equivalent of the KKK, then something is rotten in traditional religion itself — especially Bible-believing Christianity, which clearly condemns homosexual practice as sinful.

Already, “gay” activists are not shy about equating Christian-based opposition to homosexuality with “bigotry, hatred and homophobia” — i.e., irrational prejudice. If they succeed in persuading the State (through activist judges) to declare “same-sex marriage” a “constitutional right,” then the next step is to lobby government to eradicate any favored status to real man-woman marriage (and, by extension, biblical Christianity) in the public square. Admittedly, this is already happening through leftist groups like the ACLU, but State-enforced “gay marriage” would provide one more powerful tool to push old-fashioned religion to the curb — and indoctrinate children — in the name of “tolerance” and “progress.”

7) Legalized homosexual “marriage” has already been shown to hurt the adoption movement — that is, the wholesome and traditional adoption business that seeks to place children in stable homes with a mother and a father. In “gay marriage” states, adoption agencies that adhere to that time-test natural model of family will be forced by state bureaucracies to place childen in homes that are motherless or fatherless by design. Will principled adoption agencies be forced to shut down as in Britain or like Catholic Charities in Massachusetts (the Catholic Church teaches that placing children in homosexual-led households is “gravely immoral”)?

8 ) Finally: yes, Glenn, the “gays” — read: driven and well-funded homosexual activists — will “come to get us,” in one important sense (see Beck’s comment to FOX News’ Bill O’Reilly). If history is a guide, homosexual activists will absolutely set their sights on demonizing churches that refuse to marry same-sex couples (a saccharine term I avoid; these are not normal “couples” but people practicing perversion together). Here Mr. Beck, reportedly a Mormon, displays astonishing naivete, particularly for someone in the conservative information business.

Homosexual activists came after the Boy Scouts of America (a noble institution heavily supported by Mormon families) — and almost destroyed their right to define who they are as an organization. The poor Scouts came within a single vote on the U.S. Supreme Court of being FORCED by the State to allow homosexual Scoutmasters. And after losing in court, the self-styled and appropriately designated ”queer” activist movement didn’t let up one bit. Instead, they continued their evil crusade against the Boy Scouts — fighting to boot them off of all public properties (in the name of tolerance and equality, of course) and generally working to poison the Scouts’ good name in the minds of Americans.

Glen Beck should know that homosexual activists are “coming after” the Mormon Church for leading the fight for California’s Prop 8, just as he needs to know how two homosexual activists “came to get” New Mexico photographer Elaine Huguenin. They sued Huguenin for “discrimination” merely because, as a Christian, she kindly turned down a request by two lesbians to take pictures at their “same-sex commitment ceremony.” [Read the court order on the Huguenin case HERE.]

According to the court record, “Based on [Huguenin's] religious and artistic freedom of expression, she declined to photograph events or promote views which were contrary to her belief system.” Sounds like freedom to me — but one of the lesbians interpreted Huguenin’s rejection as an “expression of hatred” and sued using New Mexico’s “sexual orientation” law.

There is little in the history of pro-homosexual activism to suggest that “gay” activists “tolerate” conservative opposition or faith-based dissent. Homosexual activists lobby the media to deny ex-gays coverage (what are they afraid of?). They lobby corporations to fire people like Matt Barber who publicly oppose homosexuality. Unversites are encouraged to deny a place for people like Julea Ward, an Eastern Michigan University student who was kicked out of the graduate counseling program because she refused to give up her biblical beliefs against homosexuality.

Homosexual activists and GLBT gruops like Human Rights Campaign are working overtime to attack the Mormon church because it led the way in support of the Prop 8 amendment against “gay marriage” in California. There is a reason that the term homo-fascism is slowly working its way into the American lexicon – at least among conservatives if not libertariarians, who strangely ignore the real threat that State-enforced homosexualist “rights” poses to liberty and freedom of conscience.

‘Gay’ rights über alles

In conclusion, Mr. Beck (and all libertarians): the prospect of State-sanctioned homosexual “marriage” will lead inexorably to the systematic, forced imposition of pro-homosexualist ideology on young and old Americans alike — and will engender innumerable lawsuits by homosexual activist attorneys who believe that their “right” to be affirmed and celebrated in the culture supersedes YOUR right to live according to YOUR beliefs.

Who could put it any better than lesbian legal activist Chai Feldblum, former law professor at Georgetown University and President Obama’s recess appointee to the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC)? Regarding what she calls the “zero-sum” game that exists between homosexual legal “rights” and the freedom of religious/moral Americans to oppose homosexuality, Feldblum reportedly stated: “Gays win. Christians lose.” We hope her prediction  is wrong, but the lesbian prof’s secular “rights” formula is clearly advanced every time the noble institution of “marriage” is perverted to legally sanction ignoble, sinful conduct.

No liberty-loving American — “libertarian” or otherwise — should countenance the abrogation of others’ First Amendment and religious liberties to advance behavior condemned by Judeo-Christian teachings and still widely regarded as unnatural and immoral.

___________________________________________

TAKE ACTION: You can write to Glenn Beck at me@glennbeck.com  or contact him through his program’s website HERE.

On a related issue of confused conservatives:

ANN COULTER and “GOProud”: Write to Coulter through Townhall.com HERE (click “E-mail Ann Coulter”) regarding her ill-advised upcoming speech at GOProud, a homosexual activist group for “gay conservatives.” Coulter’s website — which has a blog doesn’t seem to have a “Contact” section – is HERE.

Prof. Rena Lindevaldsen is an instructor at AFTAH's Truth Academy Aug. 5-7.

[NOTE: this pre-taped interview will air on WYLL AM-1160 in Chicagoland on Sat., Aug. 7 at 11:00 PM]

This is Part Two of our (pre-taped) interview with Liberty University School of Law Professor Rena Lindevaldsen, who will be giving three lectures at our upcoming Truth Academy Aug. 5-7, 2010, at the Christian Liberty Academy outside Chicago. Lindevaldsen offers a fresh perspective not often heard in the legal profession — that there is a transcendent basis for the law in our nation’s biblical heritage. She describes as a “joke” President Obama’s non-defense of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which homosexual activists are trying to have declared unconstitutional.

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an  mp3 file.  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.

8-7-10, Rena Lindevaldsen, All

Teenage boy in McDonald's-France TV ad pines after another boy in his all-boys school. McDonald's COO Don Thompson says the ad will not run in the USA. But as a Christian he should be concerned that the corporation is promoting sinful, unhealthy sexual lifestyles to young men in any country.

TAKE ACTION: You can write McDonald’s HERE or call 1-800-244-6227; or write: McDonald’s Corporation, Attn: Jim Skinner and Don Thompson, 2111 McDonald’s Dr., Oak Brook, IL 60523.

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, perhaps you’ve seen the YouTube of this wicked McDonald’s TV commercial in France, featuring a homosexual teenage boy in love with another member of his all-boys school. (His out-of-touch, hopelessly ‘heterosexist’ father still thinks of his son as a potential lady’s man.) Since I saw the ad a while ago, I have stopped eating at McDonalds — which has had the added bonus of helping to keep my already protruding gut from officially being designated as “super-sized.”  

To a significant degree, McDonald’s with its high-calorie fare has always been in the business of promoting unhealthy lifestyles; now it has added unhealthy sexual lifestyles to the mix. To be sure, McDonald’s does not include promoting wholesomeness and time-tested Judeo-Christian morality among its “core values.” In a contorted defense of the fast food giant’s marketing practices, McDonald’s Chief Operation Officer Don Thompson told the Chicago Tribune in March that the French ad will not  be running in the USA. But the “Come as You Are” commercial has received wide publicity and gotten over two million hits on YouTube, so that’s a small comfort to Americans who have no interest in promoting youth homosexuality when they buy a Big Mac, or a Happy Meal for their young children.

Here’s FOX’s Bill O’Reilly segment on the French commercial — note how O’Reilly repeats the old homosexual-activist myth that “gays are ten percent of the population” — followed by more commentary and a McDonald’s-France letter defending it:  

As you can read in the Tribune interview, excerpted below, Thompson is a very public Christian, which is a good thing. But I find it deeply disturbing and hypocritical that he apparently is not troubled by McDonald’s' promotion of sinful and deviant behavior to young people — as long as it occurs in France where homosexuality is much less controversial than in the United States.

Of course, Thompson is a company man, so he has to toe the line in his public statements. But Christianity is not divided by national borders and he must know that promoting wrong and unhealthy sexual lifestyles to French teenage boys is every bit as evil and reckless as promoting sinful lifestyles to American boys. (Are you getting a feel for how post-modern, pro-homosexual Corporate America is corrupting the souls of its devoted employees?) 

[TAKE ACTION: You can write McDonald's HERE or call 1-800-244-6227; or write: McDonald's Corporation, Attn: Jim Skinner and Don Thompson, 2111 McDonald's Dr., Oak Brook, IL 60523.]

McDonald's COO Don Thompson

Changeable, male homosexuality is not “who you are” but is more rightly understood as a high-risk perversion – as evidenced by its disproportionately high linkage to various sexually transmitted diseases including HIV. (The “rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men,” the CDC reported in March. “The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men,” it reported.) Getting by on the technicality that this youth-corrupting ad is only running in another (more decadent, less religious) country is the coward’s way out of a shameful PR disaster for the fast-food behemoth. And that defense has only alienated both sides of the debate: pro-”gay” advocates are upset that the McDonald’s-France commercial is not running in the U.S.   

McDonald’s and its CEO, Jim Skinner (and COO Don Thompson) owe an apology to French moms and dads — and French young people — for promoting the unnatural, disease-producing homosexual lifestyle to French boys as some kind of innocuous, natural — and “cool” — identity. Until that apology comes, I am avoiding the famed Golden Arches. If you join me, it will be one of the healthiest corporate boycotts you ever engage in — but please make sure that you pay a visit to your local McDonald’s manager and franchise owner — to personally inform them of the reason that you are not eating there anymore. (Show them the YouTube ad.) Then they can relay your message of concern up the corporate ladder.

Thanks for standing up for moral sanity and truth against Corporate America’s increasingly brazen promotion of sexual immorality, in the name of that modern, Orwellian euphemism, ”diversity.” – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org   

P.S. Memo to pro-homosexuality activists: if you want to negate our boycott: have at it! The Big Macs, fries and Quarter-Pounders, dripping with grease and loaded with fat-producing calories, are there to be eaten. Here’s a caloric rundown of some popular McDonald’s menu items, courtesy of Shapefit.com:

Big Mac: 570 calories
Quarter Pounder: 430 (w/cheese: 530 c.)
Large French Fries: 540 c.
Crispy Chicken Deluxe Sandwich: 500 c.
File-O-Fish Sandwich: 470 c.
Big Xtra! Hamburger: 710 c. (w/ cheese 810 c.)
Oreo McFlurry: 570 c.
Sausage McMuffin w/ Egg Sandwich: 440 c.
Chicken McNuggets 9-piece: 430 c.

_______________________________________________________

Here is a clearer YouTube version of the McDonald’s ad (after it starts playing, you may need to close the “Google Ads” box so you can better view the English subtitles):

_______________________________________________________

Tribune Interview with McDonald’s COO Don Thompson:

Excerpt from Chicago Tribune reporter Michael Oneal’s June 13, 2010 interview with McDonald’s COO Don Thompson. Note that Thompson’s response begs the question: just what are McDonald’s “core values” if they include promoting the acceptance of youth homosexuality to the wider culture? (Emphasis added below:)

Tribune: A French TV ad featuring a gay teen and his father has stirred some controversy — not there, but here. Can you talk about that?

Thompson: It is an example that markets, cultures are very different around the world. (For instance), I’ve never shied away from the fact that I’m a Christian. I have my own personal beliefs and I don’t impose those on anybody else. I’ve been in countries where the majority of the people in the country don’t believe in a deity or they may be atheist. Or the majority of the country is Muslim. Or it may be the majority is much younger skewed. So when you look at all these differences, it’s not that I’m to be the judge or the jury relative to right or wrong. Having said that, at McDonald’s, there are core values we stand for and the world is getting much closer. So we have a lot of conversations. We’re going to make some mistakes at times. (We talk) about things that may have an implication in one part of the world and may be the cultural norm in another part of the world. And those are things that, yes, we’re going to learn from. But, you’re right, that commercial won’t show in the United States.

Tribune: How has it done in France?

Thompson: Interestingly enough, there have been no negatives coming out of France. The brand is a local brand and different things will occur in different parts of the world. We just have to make sure that we understand the impact one action may make on another part of the world.

_________________________________________________

[TAKE ACTION: You can write McDonald's HERE or call 1-800-244-6227; or write: McDonald's Corporation, Attn: Jim Skinner and Don Thompson, 2111 McDonald's Dr., Oak Brook, IL 60523.]

_________________________________________________

McDonald’s-France Reply to American Customer Concerned over Pro-Homosexual Ad

The following letter was sent by McDonald’s France in response to an  American customer who wrote to express his concern over the corporation’s homosexuality-affirming TV ad:

July 5, 2010

Mr. ________________,

I have received your letter regarding our advertising film “Come as You Are.”

The ad you’re referencing is one of a series of ads called “Come as You Are” which recognizes the diversity of McDonald’s customers in France.

The campaign was designed to communicate the true McDonald’s experience in France: a place where you can be yourself, whatever your state of mine, your background; a place where you can feel free of constraints, a place where you can ‘Come as You Are.’ Since its launch, the campaign has acheived high awareness and it has been received positively by the majority of the French public.

The goal with this new phase of the campaign is to continue to build on the emotional connection created between the brand and the French [public. By] going beyond a simple description of our customers we actually tell their stories, capturing their personality and their emotions.

Through these films McDonald’s pays tribute to the diversity of its customers and the richness of their stories.

I hope you’ll better understand the aim of your [sic] “Come as You Are” communications campaign.

Your [sic] sincerely,

Nathalie Febvre
Customer Services Department
McDonald’s France Services