P.S. It says a lot about the left-wing ninnies over at Media Matters that they thought this video would embarrass the Right; we used their Youtube because the quality was better than the others:

“Every piece of evidence that can be culled from the text’s literary and historical context confirms that the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice, like its prohibition of adult incestuous unions, is absolute, rejecting all forms of homosexual practice regardless of consent and commitment.” –  Robert Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary 

“St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts.  It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex.  So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so.” – Homosexual Episcopal Bishop V. (Vicky) Gene Robinson, interview with CNSNews.com

TAKE ACTION AND LEARN: Educate yourself about the Bible’s clear teaching against homosexual conduct and relationships. Begin by reading the article below, taken from Prof. Robert Gagnon’s paper, “What the Evidence Really Says about Scripture and Homosexual Practice: Five Issues, and sharing it with your Christian friends, especially those bending to pro-”gay” advocacy. And please support Prof. Gagnon by ordering his excellent 2008 DVD series, “Love, the Bible and Homosexual Practice” (cost is $42 including shipping & handling). As Christians, it is our duty to respond intelligently to false ”gay” theology, which is gaining a foothold in the Church and in the culture. And for those who are not Christian, you need to understand the bogus history that activists like (Vicky) Gene Robinson are using to advance their pro-homosexuality agenda.

_______________________________________

Dear Readers,

Please watch this short video interview of homosexual activist and Episcopal Bishop V. (Vicky) Gene Robinson’s latest attempt  to discredit the biblical (Romans 1) prohibition against homosexual practice (courtesy Eyeblast TV and CNSNews.com):

You can read a transcript of Bishop Robinson’s CNS interview HERE. It is extraordinary to behold a major denominational “Christian” leader dedicate a sizable part of his professional life to undermining the clear witness of the Bible and tradition against a particular sexual sin  — which just so happens to be the one with which he identifies. Unfortunately for Robinson, his rehashed “gay” theology does not square with history, as Prof. Robert Gagnon — the world’s leading orthodox authority on the Bible and homosexuality — reveals below.

Note Robinson’s assumption that homosexuals are ”born.” Despite the existence of a small cottage industry of pro-homosexual researchers — e.g., geneticist-turned-”gay”-activist Dean Hamer — seeking to prove inborn homosexuality, they have not succeeded in doing so. (Hamer’s media-hyped 1993 male “genetic homosexuality” study in the journal Science could not be replicated in the same journal.)

Also note that despite Robinson’s claim about innate homosexuals, the peculiar and obviously dysfunctional circumstances of his own life — starting at his birth — support a “nurture” rather than “nature” model for the causation of homosexuality. Robinson’s parents, expecting him to die, gave him two female names — Vicky Imogene — because they had hoped for a daughter. Then when he survived, they allowed him to live as a boy carrying those feminine names — a parental act that was irresponsible at best and cruel at worst. (Remember the Johnny Cash song, “A Boy Named Sue”?)

Thus, the abnormal factors that undoubtedly contributed to Bishop Robinson’s deviant proclivities and homosexual self-identification as an adult undermine his current, self-serving, specious claim that modern, “monogamous” homosexuality is some kind of benign, naturally “oriented” variation on life that was not yet discovered by the Apostle Paul. [See related AFTAH article: "Researcher: Half of Gay Couples Choose to be ‘Non-Monogamous.’"]

Prof. Rob Gagnon

Moreover, if we know that thousands of men and women have left homosexuality through faith in Jesus Christ and through various methods and circumstances — why would we treat this particular sin as somehow special and unchangeable — or not sinful at all, as long as it is “domesticated”?

Professor Rob Gagnon and other scholars — including some homosexuals — who have studied the context of the New Testament Book of Romans take issue with Bishop Robinson’s claim about monogamous homosexuality not being proscribed. TAKE ACTION AND LEARN:  Please share this article with your friends and support Prof. Gagnon (www.robgagnon.net) — a rare, indefatigable foe of pro-homosexual political correctness in the academy — by ordering his 2008 DVD series, “Love, the Bible and Homosexual Practice” (cost is $42 including shipping & handling). The excerpt below is taken from Gagnon’s 2009 paper, “What the Evidence Really Says about Scripture and Homosexual Practice: Five Issues.”

– Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.” (I Corinthians 16: 13-14)

_________________________________________

Prof. Gagnon Responds to “Gay” Theological Arguments on the Book of Romans:

3. Romans 1:24-27 and the Erroneous “Exploitation Argument”

Claim: The Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice in Romans 1:24‐27 applies only to exploitative and hedonistic forms of homosexual practice such as sex with slaves, prostitutes, and adolescents.

What the evidence really shows: Every piece of evidence that can be culled from the text’s literary and historical context confirms that the Bible’s prohibition of homosexual practice, like its prohibition of adult incestuous unions, is absolute, rejecting all forms of homosexual practice regardless of consent and commitment.

Five lines of evidence make this point clear. First, Paul in Rom 1:24-27 rejects homosexual practice because it is a violation of the God’s creation of “male and female” as a sexual pair in Genesis. In Rom 1:23-27 Paul intentionally echoed Gen 1:26-27, making eight points of correspondence, in the same tripartite structure, between the two sets of texts (humans/image/likeness, birds/cattle/reptiles, male/female). Paul was rejecting homosexual practice in the first instance because it was a violation of the male-female prerequisite for sexual relations ordained by the Creator at creation, not because of how well or badly it was done in his cultural milieu.

Second, the kind of nature argument that Paul employs in Rom 1:18-27 isn’t conducive to a distinction between exploitative and nonexploitative forms of homosexual practice. For Paul contended that female-female and male-male intercourse was “contrary to nature” because it violated obvious clues given in the material structures of creation that male and female, not two males or two females, are each other’s sexual “counterpart” or “complement” (to use the language of Gen 2:18, 20) in terms of anatomy, physiology, and psychology. What Paul says regarding the vertical vice of idolatry (1:19-23) is equally true of the horizontal vice of same-sex intercourse: male-female complementarity is “clearly seen, being mentally apprehended by means of the things made” (1:19-20). Some have argued that the ancients had no comprehension of a complementarity argument. Yet as classicist Thomas K. Hubbard notes in his magisterial sourcebook of texts pertaining to Homosexuality in Greece and Rome (University of California Press, 2003): “Basic to the heterosexual position [among Greek and Roman moralists in the first few centuries A.D.] is the characteristic Stoic appeal to the providence of Nature, which has matched and fitted the sexes to each other” (p. 444). Hubbard is supportive of homosexual relationships, yet admits the point.

Third, the fact that Paul in Rom 1:27 specifically indicts male homosexual relations that involve mutual, reciprocal affections—“males, having left behind the natural use of the female, were inflamed with their yearning for one another”— precludes any supposition that Paul is thinking
only of coercive relationships.

Fourth, Paul’s indictment of lesbianism in Romans 1:26 further confirms that his indictment of homosexual practice is absolute, since female homosexuality in antiquity was not primarily known, or criticized, for the exploitative practices of sex with slaves, prostitutes, or children. And there can be little doubt that Paul was indicting female homosexuality, as evidenced by:

1. the parallelism of the language of 1:26 (“females exchanged the natural use”) and 1:27 (“likewise also the males leaving behind the natural use of the female”);
2. the fact that in antiquity lesbian intercourse was the form of female intercourse most commonly labeled “contrary to nature” and paired with male homosexual practice;
3. the fact of nearly universal male opposition to lesbianism in antiquity, even by men engaged in homosexual practice; and
4. the fact that lesbian intercourse was the dominant interpretation of Romans 1:26 in the patristic period.

Fifth, contrary to false claims that people in the Greco-Roman world had no concept of committed homosexual unions, there is plenty of evidence for the conception and existence of loving homosexual relationships, including semi-official “marriages” between men and between women. Moreover, we know of some Greco-Roman moralists who acknowledged the existence of loving homosexual relationships while rejecting even these as unnatural (indeed, we can trace this idea back to Plato’s Laws). This is also true of the Church Fathers. For example, Clement of Alexandria (late second century) referred to “women … contrary to nature … marrying women” (Paidagogos 3.3.21.3). Obviously marriage implies commitment (else there is no need to marry) yet commitment does not change the unnatural and sinful character of the relationship. And it should go without saying that Jewish writers in Paul’s day and beyond rejected all forms of homosexual activity. For example, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus stated the obvious to his Roman readers: “The law [of Moses] recognizes only sexual intercourse that is according to nature, that which is with a woman…. But it abhors the intercourse of males with males” (Against Apion 2.199).

It is hardly surprising, then, that even Louis Crompton, a homosexual scholar, acknowledges this point in his massive work, Homosexuality and Civilization (Harvard University Press, 2003; 500 pgs.):

“However well-intentioned,” the interpretation that Paul’s words were not directed at “bona fide” homosexuals in committed relationships….seems strained and unhistorical. Nowhere does Paul or any other Jewish writer of this period imply the least acceptance of same-sex relations under any circumstance. The idea that homosexuals might be redeemed by mutual devotion would have been wholly foreign to Paul or any other Jew or early Christian. (p. 114)

Also worth noting is the falsity of claims that the ancient world knew nothing akin to our understanding of a homosexual orientation or of congenital influences on at least some homosexual development. As classicist Thomas K. Hubbard (cited above) notes:

Homosexuality in this era [i.e., of the early Imperial Age of Rome] may have ceased to be merely another practice of personal pleasure and began to be viewed as an essential and central category of personal identity, exclusive of and antithetical to heterosexual orientation. (p. 386)

Bernadette Brooten, a lesbian New Testament scholar who has written the most important book on lesbianism in antiquity also acknowledges this point. She states that “Paul could have believed” that some persons attracted to members of the same sex “were born that way and yet still condemn them [better: their behaviors] as unnatural and shameful…. I see Paul as condemning all forms of homoeroticism as the unnatural acts of people who had turned away from God” (Love Between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism [University of Chicago, 1996], 244).

From the Republican Study Committee:

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and homosexual activist Dan Savage (right) ridicule FOX News' Brit Hume for saying that Tiger Woods needs Christ's forgiveness.

Well, we extolled Brit Hume and his sage advice to Tiger Woods, so now we have to give you some of the hyperventilating comments from America’s reactionary secular bigots, headquartered at MSNBC, of course. That includes the left-wing network’s chief blowhard, Keith Olbermann, who joined self-described “radical sex-advice columnist faggot,” Dan (“Three-Way”) Savage, in ridiculing Hume’s heartfelt Christian outreach to Woods.

Why on earth is Olbermann still a TV commentator for NFL games (for NBC Sports)? Seems that if the NFL cannot tolerate Rush Limbaugh as an owner, why does it allow a mean-spirited, Christian-bashing, hard-left talker to be connected to the league in any way? Let’s see if we can help to change that. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

TAKE ACTION: Please join us in urging the NFL and NBC to drop Olbermann from his NFL media duties.  Here is the NFL Comment Page and the NBC Sports Contact Page. E-mail NBC Sports directly at nbcsportshelp@nbcuni.com; or send a regular-mail letter to:

NBC Sports — Please Fire Keith Olbermann

c/o National Broadcasting Company, Inc.
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY

My good friend and AFTAH Board Member Matt Barber writes:

______________________________

The Crucifixion of Brit Hume

By Matt Barber
Friday, January 08, 2010

During the Roman Empire’s secularist era those who acknowledged the deity of Christ were frequently fed to the lions to entertain – for lack of a better word – the “progressive” elites of the day. There’s little doubt that if many of today’s secular-“progressives” (more accurately: “moonbat liberals”) had their way, Caesar Obama would call out the lions once again.

Nothing makes the left lose its collective noodle like an open proclamation of Christian faith. You don’t see it when Muslims proselytize in government schools; the ACLU doesn’t sue when Wiccans share their witchy ways; militant “gay” activists don’t picket Buddhist temples with bullhorns while inhabitants grasp at Zen. No, there’s something about Christianity that just drives ‘em nuts. Always has. Always will.

Case in point: Recently, on two separate occasions, Fox News veteran Brit Hume both publicly pronounced his own faith in Jesus Christ and boldly suggested that Tiger Woods might find “forgiveness and redemption” for his serial philandering should he “turn to the Christian faith.”

Hume first offered Tiger the advice on “Fox News Sunday” and then reiterated his sage, though decidedly non-PC council on “The O’Reilly Factor” the following night. When asked by host Bill O’Reilly what kind of response he’d received for his comments, Hume replied, in part: “It’s always been a puzzling thing to me. The Bible even speaks of it. You speak the name Jesus Christ… and all hell breaks loose.”

Yes indeed.

After Hume made his comments, and as if on cue (Lord forgive them for not knowing what they do or why they do it) liberals went apoplectic. Here’s a small sampling:

As reported by CNSNews.com: “Tom Shales, media critic for the Washington Post , in a Tuesday column, demanded that Hume apologize and called his Christian remarks ‘even only a few days into January, as one of the most ridiculous of the year.’”

MSNBC’s reliably raspy Keith Olbermann accused Hume of attempting “to threaten Tiger Woods into converting to Christianity” and demanded that his Fox News ratings superior “keep religious advocacy out of public life” (back in the closet, Brit old boy).

Olblubberman then compared Hume to a terrorist, suggesting that “the worst example” of this kind of “proselytizing” are “jihadists.” Finally, he betrayed the left’s typical anti-Christian bigotry, suggesting that Jesus may have been a homosexual and wondering aloud: “WWJDIHS: What would Jesus do if he’s straight?” [Note: the conservative "Newsbusters" blog of Media Research Center interpreted Olbermann's remarks differently -- saying that WWJDIHS refers to "What would Jesus do if he strayed"; start watching at about 3:15 in the five-and-a-half-minute MSNBC video.]

While the mainstream media’s rage was clumsily managed (or masked), unbridled hate boiled over in the left-wing blogosphere. On the sexual anarchist site, “JoeMyGod,” poster “QScribe” suggested that Brit Hume’s deceased son had been “gay” and viciously accused Hume of being responsible for the young man’s suicide: “Brit Hume still hasn’t ‘repented’ for trashing his gay son and driving him to suicide. When I want moral guidance from a pig like that, I’ll be sure to ask. Until then, he really ought to STFU.” (Hume has publicly shared that his son’s heartbreaking suicide played a large role in his acceptance of Christ.)

The next commenter went so far as to cruelly imply that Hume had sexually molested his own child and further mocked the tragic suicide, writing: “Dead victims don’t tell on their molesters.”

Commenting on the Huffington Post, “Kandaher” bypassed Hume altogether and aimed his vitriol directly at his Creator: “anyone (sic) watched ‘The passion of Christ’? I thoruhgly (sic) enjoyed it. Nothing like watching this bloke getting beaten up! He deserved what he got and more!”

You get the idea.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I must confess that I very much enjoy watching liberals go goofy when the light of truth pierces that shadowy void called moral relativism. When the left’s religion of choice – secular-humanism – is challenged through exposure to the gospel message, they almost universally and instinctively react with such visceral, knee-jerk spasms. You can set your clock to it.

But believe it or not, there’s actually something rather delightful about such hateful lashing about. These poor souls – to be pitied and prayed for – fail to realize that, manifest within their own unwittingly bizarre behavior, is certain affirmation of the very words of Christ on the subject.

Jesus addressed this peculiar and deeply spiritual phenomenon on more than one occasion over two thousand years ago. In John 15:18-20 (NIV), for instance, He reminds His followers: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.”

Now, I’m real sorry that most “progressives” and other non-believers feel that Christianity is deficiently “tolerant” or “inclusive” of various man-made religions and lifestyle choices. But it’s just not our call. Christ Himself reveals over and again that the pathway to heaven is a very narrow one, requiring membership in a rather “exclusive” club – a club wherein belief in Him and repentance from sin are the only membership requirements.

Christ said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6). Note that, rather conspicuously, He did not say: “…No one comes to the Father except through me, the Buddha, Muhammad, Ganesh, and – on Tuesdays – L. Ron Hubbard.”

But lest you have any doubt, consider John 3:36, which warns every man, woman and child on earth – past, present and future: “Whoever believes in the Son [Jesus] has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.”

So, Brit Hume had it right, didn’t he? I mean, it is kind of an all or nothing proposition, isn’t it?

As my favorite author and Christian apologist C.S. Lewis famously pointed out in his blockbuster book “Mere Christianity,” Christ could only have been one of three things: A lunatic, a liar, or – as Jesus oft claimed and as billions have believed – the sovereign Lord and Creator of the universe.

Noted Lewis:

“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” – C.S. Lewis

So, what does this all mean? Well, and please take this in the spirit (little ‘s’) intended: Brit Hume’s woolly, wily, wandering critics really ought to just un-knot their knickers; mudra, mantra or something; and seriously reflect upon the man’s words and heart.

Perhaps they should – being all “tolerant,” “diverse” and whatnot – consider, if only for a moment, the very Spirit (big ‘S’) from which came those words and was formed that heart.

In the meantime, to Mr. Hume: “Well done good and faithful servant.”

__________________________

Matt Barber [e-mail: jmattbarber@comcast.net] is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He is author of the book “The Right Hook – From the Ring to the Culture War” and serves as Director of Cultural Affairs with Liberty Counsel. (This information is provided for identification purposes only.)

WARNING: Offensive Descriptions, Web Links

Dan Savage, anti-Christian activist, deviant sex advice columnist, prolific hatemonger -- and 'Gay Grinch 2009' candidate. See his "gay marriage" YouTube video below.

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, we have heard from a few readers who suggested that prolific homosexual writer and sex advice columnist Dan Savage be added to our “Gay Grinch of the Year” 2009 contest, and so he is. Only a perversion activist as twisted as Savage could stage a contest with his readers to come up with a sickening definition to associate with “santorum” — because he was upset that former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum (R) made comments critical of homosexuality (in 2003). (And how appropriate that the winner of Savage’s little nastiness competition was a disgusting by-product of the crime against nature itself, anal sodomy; see his “santorum” definition HERE in the Urban Dictionary.)

Savage is also the lovely fellow who engaged in “Germ Terrorism” against GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer in 2000, by, as Wikipedia reports, “volunteer[ing] for the Bauer campaign with the intent to infect the candidate with his flu.” Picture the pathetic and sniffling Savage  walking around Bauer’s empty Iowa campaign office licking doorknobs; later he presented Bauer with a saliva-soaked pen to autograph a picture of his adopted son, posing as a pro-life fan of Bauer. (Don’t you just love modern liberalism?)

Who would have thunk that our “Gay Grinch” award would end up sullying the reputation of the “real” TV Grinch by comparison to such Major League deviants and hatemongers as Savage?

But enough about Savage’s past extremism. Recently the Seattle-based sex columnist made a very “queer” plea for homosexual “marriage” (watch YouTube below) — not seeming to comprehend the radical difference between evolving reforms within marriage and the revolutionary homosexualization of “marriage” that essentially redefines the institution to mean anything. (If two men can get “married” on the basis of “love,” how are we going to stop a man and two women from doing so on the same basis? In fact, polygamists feel they have a greater claim to legal marriage than homosexuals because at least they have opposite genders and can produce children on their own.)

You will note that toward the end of the video Savage shamelessly appeals to the fact that he has a child (which he adopted with homosexual partner Terry), thus seemingly satisfying one his critics’ criteria for real marriage. But here Savage has the chutzpah of ten Gay Grinches — plus two: as we reported, he thinks “monogamy is optional” for marriage and admits to having sexual three-ways with Terry and another man — one with an ex-boyfriend of Savage, “a Microsoft millionaire who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars building a ‘playroom’ in his basement — a kind of sex toy wonderland.” Yuck. (Keep in mind these are “gay parents” of a young boy.) Savage claims that allowing heterosexual spouses a “few tightly controlled” affairs would help lower the divorce rate.

To protect his overactive behind, Savage then oddly asserts in his column recommending non-monogamous “marriages”: “”We’ve never done anything, nor would we ever do anything, that would put our child at risk.” Earth to Savage: it’s way too late for that! But I suppose that from the poor boy’s perspective, if you’re being raised by two homosexual men — one of whom writes a perverted, weekly sex column and shills for “nonmonogamous marriage”– finding out one day that they engaged in a sadomasochistic threesome with another guy could hardly be construed as shocking news.

Nevertheless, I have a question for Dan and his domestic homosexual lover Terry: who watches the kid when you guys are having one of your “tightly controlled” three-way sex romps? — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org.

“I am a lesbian, and it was a later in life recognition of that fact.” – Meredith Baxter

So Meredith Baxter of Family Ties TV fame is a practicing lesbian (after three divorces)? Does this mean — especially since the news was forced out by the National Enquirer — that Baxter deserves respect and praise as a lesbian for her current sexual status? Does this mean that she is being “truthful to herself,” as one CNN Showbiz Tonight commentator said last night in a cliche-filled analysis of Baxter’s revelation on yesterday’s Today show?

Of course not. Every homosexual “coming out” is a tragedy. Baxter became a lesbian, and is now in a seven-year sexually immoral relationship with another woman, following three failed marriages to men that produced five children. (Is her lesbianism a pitiable retreat after failed relationships with men?) The wrongness of her homosexual relationship (from a biblical, truthful perspective) is not mitigated by the current politically-correct zeitgeist that would extend respect and “civil rights” to deviant behavior condemned by God. Moreover, Baxter is living proof that people can change from ‘heterosexuals’ to ‘homosexuals,’ so how can “gay” fanatics like Wayne Besen continue to deny that the reverse can occur?

Homosexuality is about changeable behavior, not innate or inherent “identity.” It’s not about “who you are,” but “what you do.” People practicing heterosexuality can start practicing homosexuality, and vice versa. Each of us is responsible before God for his or her behavior here on earth.

Please pray for this lost and confused woman, that she would repent and find forgiveness through Jesus Christ. Remember: there were “ex-gays” in Bible times. More on this story in a future post. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.com

Here’s a YouTube of Baxter’s interview yesterday with NBC’s Matt Lauer:

“Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.” – The Bible, Book of Romans 1:24-26

Then there are the targets of more crass homosexual extremism such as Maggie Gallagher, Greg Quinlan, AFTAH, Mike Heath, and pretty much every pro-family leader who still resists the “queer” activist agenda — and even churches that stick to the Word of God on sexual morality or that dare advance the redemptive truth that men and women can overcome homosexuality through Christ.

A relatively new person on the victim list is Julea Ward,  a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University’s (EMU) School of Counseling who was expelled from the program because she said that as a counselor she could not affirm a client’s homosexual relationship due to her belief in Jesus Christ and biblical morality. Ward is being helped by Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), a Christian legal defense group. – Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org. This is an ADF video:

Posted by MassResistance October 30, 2009:

MassResistance reports: A Massachusetts man was fired from a national retail corporation because of his traditional beliefs on same-sex marriage.  Peter Vadala was formally dismissed from his job as second deputy manager of the Brookstone store at Boston’s Logan Airport on August 12, 2009, after a supervisor reported him to Human Resources regarding an incident two days earlier. Story continues under video, which was shot by our friends at MassResistance:

As Peter described the incident (see video above), he came to work on August 10 and began his day normally. A female manager from another store was in the store and began talking to Peter about her upcoming marriage.  When Peter asked “where is he taking you for the honeymoon,” she corrected him and said she was not getting married to “he” but to another woman.

Peter did not immediately react, but when the manager sensed Peter’s discomfort with the subject of same-sex “marriage”, the woman apparently continued bringing it up to Peter throughout the day, reiterating that she was getting married to another woman. Finally, after the fourth or fifth time she brought it up, Peter remarked that his Christian beliefs did not accept same-sex “marriage.” At that point the woman became very angry and bluntly told Peter that he needed to “get over it” and said that she would be immediately contacting the Human Resources department.

A few hours later Peter was notified by a Human Resources representative that he was suspended from work without pay, effective immediately. Two days later, on August 12, after some further interaction with the Human Resources department, he was formally notified that he was terminated from the company.

Brookstone’s termination letter to Peter states that “in the State of Massachusetts, same-sex marriage is legal.” It goes on to describe Peter’s actions as constituting “harassment” and that his comments were “inappropriate and unprofessional.” It further accuses him of “imposing” his beliefs upon others. … [continue at MassResistance site]

READ THE REST OF THE STORY on MassResistance’s website

I agree with my good friend Matt Barber, who is also a Board Member of Americans For Truth in addition to his important work at Liberty Counsel. It is not ethical nor good strategy for the “pro-family” movement to promote one evil and public-policy disaster (changeable and sinful behavior as a government-backed “civil right”) to fight another (homosexual “marriage”). Yet that is precisely what the Yes on 1 campaign’s pro-domestic partnership ad called “It’s Possible” did. [Click HERE for AFTAH's election story.] Here again is the text of that misguided Yes on 1 ad used in Maine:

‘Abandoning traditional marriage entails real consequences, yet we want to be tolerant of gays. Maine’s Domestic Partnership laws provide substantial legal protection for gay couples. Any problems remaining can be addressed without dismantling traditional marriage. It’s possible to support the civil rights of all citizens and protect traditional marriage at the same time.’

We who claim to follow God are lacking in integrity if we promote the normalization of homosexuality as part of some (perhaps well-intentioned) utilitarian plan to ostensibly “save” traditional marriage. Indeed, the irony of the ad text above is that progressive concessions on “domestic partnership” and “civil unions” legislation will, in fact, dismantle traditional marriage. Yes on 1 PR consultant Frank Schubert’s compromising spin will pave the way for disaster in the pro-family movement, as it undermines our greatest strength: our commitment to the truth. It’s time to reject Political Correctness and get back to basics in the pro-family movement. — Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.org

P.S. Young people won’t buy this political spin anyway: looking for hypocrisy, they will merely say that if “gay domestic partners” truly are worthy of state recognition in the name of civil rights, then why NOT allow them to marry (and why NOT teach children “gay”-affirming lessons in school)?  The debate will only turn around when we succeed in re-explaining to Americans — both young and old — why homosexual behavior is wrong and is NOT anything like a “civil right,” and about how newfangled homosexual “rights” negate our precious First Amendment freedoms.

Read Matt’s statement below and then his additional remarks that follow it:

____________________________________

STATEMENT BY MATT BARBER
Contact:  jmattbarber@comcast.net

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, Nov. 4, 2009

Counterfeit Marriage Rejected in Maine

Lynchburg, VA – Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action, issued the following statement on news that the voters of Maine have rejected counterfeit “same-sex marriage” by 53% – 47%:

“There’s good news and bad news here,” said Barber. “The good news is that even in one of the most liberal States in the Union, Maine, the people have once again rejected the ridiculous and oxymoronic notion of ‘same sex marriage.’ The momentum has again shifted –– hopefully for good this time –– in favor of protecting legitimate marriage. A counterfeit is a counterfeit. An orange is an orange no matter how much you want it to be a turnip. This isn’t about ‘marriage.’ It’s about hurting and broken people desperately seeking affirmation of an objectively deviant lifestyle. One that, even in their heart of hearts, they know to be a dead end. As for the militant ‘No on 1’ homosexual activists?  I’m reminded of spoiled children dressing up and playing house, refusing to come in when mom calls for dinner.

“Here’s the bad news. The margin of victory could have been greater. Many behind the ‘Yes on 1’ campaign, rather than simply telling the truth, chose the Neville Chamberlain approach. They merely circled the wagons around the word ‘marriage,’ even suggesting that ‘domestic partnerships’ (‘gay marriages’ by another name) are acceptable. This makes no sense. If that’s a viable compromise, then why not simply allow ‘gay’ duos the word ‘marriage’? It’s an incongruity that demands an explanation. This is an historic battle for the minds and souls of our children –– for our very culture. The mealy-mouthed approach must end. This  is not just about ‘marriage.’  It has everything to do with forced affirmation of homosexuality – under penalty of law. Indeed everyone who fought hard to defend marriage in Maine is to be congratulated, but if it weren’t for a brave group of truth tellers – Paul Madore, Peter LaBarbera  and Brian Camenker ––  who came to Maine in the final hour to hold a press conference and address the pink elephant in the room –– homosexual deviancy and the radical ‘gay’ agenda –– counterfeit marriage might have prevailed.”

###

Added comments by Barber for Americans For Truth:

“Here’s is a mere sampling of what God – the sovereign creator of the universe – has to say about deviant homosexual conduct which He calls ‘abominable’:

‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.’ Leviticus 18:22

‘Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.’ - Romans 1:26-27

“By contrast, here’s what the organized “Yes on 1” campaign had to say about the same topic in an ad [view the ad HERE] they ran up to yesterdays vote:

‘Abandoning traditional marriage entails real consequences, yet we want to be tolerant of gays. Maine’s Domestic Partnership laws provide substantial legal protection for gay couples. Any problems remaining can be addressed without dismantling traditional marriage. It’s possible to support the civil rights of all citizens and protect traditional marriage at the same time.’‘

“It’s simply impossible to reconcile the two. If the Pro-Family movement wishes to survive, we must stop listening to political focus groups and PR , and start listening to the inerrant word of God.”

Ironic Indignation: will Speaker Pelosi work use her unprecedented influence to stop the anti-Christian intolerance and gross incivility toward people of faith in her own congressional district?

Recently, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) accused Americans protesting Obama-care at congressional townhall meetings of engaging in “un-American” conduct. Wrote Speaker Pelosi August 10: “These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task [health care reform] for decades.”

Speaker Pelosi, representing the intolerant glass house of San Francisco, should hardly be throwing stones with her selective outrage designed to discredit Americans opposed to expansive government. In her city, “shouting down” opponents has become an art form for the Left. Below is a video by veteran homosexual activist Michael Petrelis, founding member of the homosexual extremist group ACT UP, in which Petrelis shouts down an Americans For Truth-led coalition protest last year condemning San Francisco’s allowance of public nudity and sex in the streets (i.e., at the annual deviance sex-fest known as the Folsom Street Fair). Note in this homosexual activist video how the police officer ignores my plea for speech rights and allows Petrelis to disrupt our press event. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth

In future posts, we’ll have more on Pelosi’s subsequent ironic pleas for civility. Note the vulgar Petrelis’ simulation of a sex act on a banana and his enthusiastic defense of public sex and nudity in his city. In most other cities, police put a distance between opposing sides so that each can exercise its right to speak out. Shown in the video are AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera (asking police to prevent Petrlelis from disrupting the press conference), Diane Gramley of American Family Association of Pennsylvania, and Linda Harvey of Mission America. The coalition press conference occurred September 27, 2008, a day before the perverse “Folsom Street Fair,” which again “tolerated” public nudity.

Obama likes to play basketball, and the head fake is an important part of the game. You try to get your defender to commit with a head or body fake, throwing him off balance so you can move in to take the real shot (or get a clear shot at the basket). “Both Sides” Barack, the candidate, made some pretty good head fakes on abortion and homosexual “marriage” during the campaign, and many Americans were fooled. He said he wanted to “reduce the number of abortions” and pretended to be a strong supporter of preserving traditional marriage. (Remember the Saddleback Church debate moderated by Rick Warren?)

Then the real Obama went to the hoop: he championed the radical Freedom of Choice Act to rally his pro-abortion base as a candidate, expanded taxpayer-funded abortions worldwide as president, and now is moving to destroy DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act (signed into law by Democrat Bill Clinton in 1996). But the double-game is getting much tougher for Obama: a growing number of Americans are seeing him for what he is: the most radically left president ever to occupy the Oval Office. Shame on the gullible Christians and religionists who went for his head fakes. We’d be fools to rely on them again to “defend” life and marriage. — Peter LaBarbera

P.S. I wonder if Obama is aware of Planned Parenthood’s racist origins.

[This YouTube video had only 85,371 hits as of Aug. 30, 2009.]

Peter LaBarbera, president and founder of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, opens AFTAH’s June 17, 2009 press conference on President Obama’s radical homosexual agenda. LaBarbera exposes Obama’s hypocrisy on traditional marriage, and plays the infamous “Fistgate” audiotape revealing how — at a “gay youth” event — underage girls and boys were exposed to graphic verbal “how-to” lessons on “fisting” and other homosexual perversions. (Fistgate occurred at a “queer” youth panel as part of a 2000 conference sponsored by GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network.) GLSEN founder Kevin Jennings was appointed by President Obama to head up the Dep’t of Education’s “Safe and Drug-Free Schools” agency. A DVD of the AFTAH press conference in Chicago is available for $20 postpaid. Designate “Obama press conference” with your online donation or send your check to: Americans For Truth, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.

This pro-family press conference — largely ignored by the dominant liberal media — was organized by Americans For Truth About Homosexuality. Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs at the Liberty Counsel (and an AFTAH Board Member), was fired by Allstate Insurance Company in 2005 because he wrote an online article — on his own time — critical of organized homosexuality. Since then, he has risen to his current position as one of Americas leading defenders of natural marriage and family. He will be the keynote speaker at AFTAH’s fund-raising banquet outside Chicago on Oct. 24, 2009.

America is getting to know the real Barack Obama — and he’s a lot more radical than a 2008 presidential candidate by the same name. This aggressively pro-homosexual speech by Michelle Obama to the Democratic National Committee’s Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council (June 27, 2008) had only 56,805 views on YouTube as of August 7, 2009. Most Americans have never seen this side of Michelle Obama, just as most have not seen the side of her husband that celebrated America’s biggest abortion “provider,” Planned Parenthood, in a 2007 campaign speech. (That speech had only 84,875 views on YouTube as of Aug. 7.) Social liberals and “gay” activists will cheer this speech by Michelle; everyone else won’t recognize her vis-à-vis the “apolitical” First Lady described by the national media. (A transcript follows the video; emphasis and web links added.) — Peter LaBarbera

To put it in perspective: timeless truth from that “obscure” passage in the New Testament.–Ed.:

“Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” (Romans 1:26-27)

_______________________________________

Incomplete transcript of Michelle Obama speech to DNC’s Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council, June 27, 2008 (emphasis and web links added):

Reprinted from TransGriot website: http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2008/06/michelle-obamas-remarks-to-dncs-gay-and.html

Thank you Howard Dean [then Democratic National Committee Chairman], for all your hard work building our party. We are proud to have you as our party Chairman. I want to recognize the members of UNITE HERE Local 6 who are working this event tonight. And thank you all for inviting me to spend some time with you.

I’m honored to be with you in a week that reminds us just how far we’ve come as a country. Five years ago today, the Supreme Court delivered justice with the decision in Lawrence v. Texas that same-sex couples would never again be persecuted through use of criminal law. And on Saturday, we recognize the anniversary of the day people stood up at Stonewall and said “enough.”

These anniversaries remind us that no matter who we are, or where we come from, or what we look like, we are only here because of the brave efforts of those who came before us. That we are all only here because of those who marched and bled and died, from Selma to Stonewall, in a pursuit of that more perfect union that is the promise of this country.

Over the course of this campaign, we’ve seen a fundamental change in the level of political engagement in this country. We’ve seen a renewed sense of possibility and a hunger for change. We’ve seen people of all ages and backgrounds investing time and energy like never before; writing $20, $30, $50 checks; investing for the first time ever in a political candidate. We’ve seen people talking to their neighbors about candidates and issues; working hard to clarify misperceptions; challenging one another to think differently about the world and our place in it.

It’s precisely this type of individual engagement and investment that has been the mission of my husband’s life. Barack has always believed that there is more in this country that unites us than divides us; that our common stories and struggles and values are what make this country great; that meaningful change never happens from the top down but from the bottom up.

I’ll never forget the first time I realized there was something special about Barack. It was nearly 20 years ago this summer. Barack and I were just getting to know one another, and he thought the best way for me to get to know him better was to get a better sense of the work he cared about most — his work as a community organizer.

He took me to a small church basement on the South Side of Chicago, where a group of neighborhood residents were gathered; folks he knew from his years as a community organizer before he went to law school. They were desperate for change. They were regular Americans struggling to build a decent life for themselves and their families. Single mothers living paycheck to paycheck; grandparents raising grandkids despite an income that wouldn’t allow it; men unable to support their families because jobs had disappeared when steel mills closed. Like most Americans, they didn’t want much; they weren’t asking for much: just dignity and respect.

I watched as Barack walked into the room, took off his jacket, rolled up his sleeves, and instantly connected with each and every person in that room. He spoke eloquently of “the world as it is” and “the world as it should be.” He said the key to change is understanding that our job as citizens of this nation is to work hard each and every day to narrow the gap between those two ideas. He explained that we often settle for the world as it is even if it doesn’t reflect our personal values. But he reminded us that it is only through determination and hard work that we slowly make the world as it is and the world as it should be one in the same. His words were powerful not only because they made us believe in him – they challenged each of us to believe in ourselves.

One of the many reasons I’m proud of the way Barack has handled himself in this campaign is that he is still the same man I fell in love with in that church basement. His unyielding belief in that simple idea – closing the gap between the world as it is and the world as it should be – is precisely why he’ll be a President you can be proud of.

Barack is not new to the cause of the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] community. It has been a conviction of his career since he was first elected to public office. In his first year in the Illinois State Senate, he cosponsored a bill amending the Illinois Human Rights Act to include protections for LGBT men and women. He worked on that bill for seven years, serving as chief cosponsor and lobbying his colleagues to reject the political expedience of homophobia and make LGBT equality a priority. In 2004, his efforts paid off as that bill finally became law, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity in the workplace, in housing, and in public places.

He’s led on gender-based violence with his work on the Illinois Gender Violence Act, successfully reaching across the aisle to put in place the nation’s strongest law giving the survivors of sexual assault or domestic violence legal remedy against their attackers. He joined his colleagues in fighting to include explicit protections for the LGBT community in that act. He lost that battle, but his efforts brought gender violence in the LGBT community into the political consciousness like never before.

In 2004, after hearing from gay friends and supporters about the hurtful impact of DOMA, Barack went on record during his U.S. Senate race calling for its complete repeal. And as a U.S. Senator, he voted to protect our Constitution from the stain of discrimination by voting against the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Barack’s record is clear. There is so much at stake in this election. The direction of our country hangs in the balance. We are faced with those two clear choices: The world as it is, and the world as it should be. We have to ask ourselves: Are we willing to settle for the world as it is or are we willing to work for the world as it should be?

Despite the extraordinary challenges we face today, we have a candidate who believes that the country is moving in the right direction, despite the inequalities created over the last 8 years.

And then we have Barack Obama, who believes that we must fight for the world as it should be.

A world where together we work to reverse discriminatory laws like DOMA and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

A world where LGBT Americans get a fair shake at working hard to get ahead without workplace discrimination.

A world where our federal government fully protects all of us — including LGBT Americans — from hate crimes.

And, a world where our federal laws don’t discriminate against same-sex relationships, including equal treatment for any relationship recognized under state law.

A world that recognizes that equality in relationship, family, and adoption rights is not some abstract principle; it’s about whether millions of LGBT Americans can finally live lives marked by dignity and freedom. Barack has made crystal clear his commitment to ensuring full equality for LGBT couples. That is why he supports robust civil unions. That is why he has said that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide for themselves how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples — whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage. And that is why he opposes all divisive and discriminatory constitutional amendments – whether it’s a proposed amendment to the California and Florida Constitutions or the U.S. Constitution. Because the world as it should be rejects discrimination.

But, it’s not just about the positions you take, it’s also about the leadership you provide.

Barack’s got the courage to talk to skeptical audiences; not just friendly ones. That’s why he told a crowd at a rally in Texas that gays and lesbians deserve equality. Now, the crowd got pretty quiet. But Barack said “now, I’m a Christian, and I praise Jesus every Sunday.” And the crowd started cheering. Then he said, “I hear people saying things that I don’t think are very Christian with respect to people who are gay and lesbian.” And you know what? The crowd kept cheering.

That’s why he told evangelicals at Rick Warren’s Saddleback church that we need a renewed call to action on HIV and AIDS.

That’s why he went to Ebenezer Baptist Church and said that we need to get over homophobia in the African-American community; that if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll embrace our gay brothers and sisters instead of scorning them. And that’s why he stood up at the 2004 Democratic National Convention and told all of America that we refuse to be divided anymore.

That’s the choice in this election. Between slipping backward and moving forward. Between being timid or being courageous. Between fighting for the world as it should be, or settling for the world as it is.

My husband is running for President to build an America that lives up to the ideals written into our Constitution. We have just come through a historic primary election where a woman and a black man were running to become President of the United States. It hasn’t been painless, but change never is. As I travel this country, I am certain that we have arrived at a moment in our collective history where we are ready to move forward and create the “world as it should be.”

I know which world Barack will fight for each and every day as your President. But he can’t do it alone. As he said in that church basement, change happens when ordinary people are ready to take the reins of their own destiny. He needs you by his side every step of the way. That kind of change won’t be easy. There will be powerful forces who believe that things should stay just the way they are.

That’s where you come in. Your voices of truth and hope and of possibility have to drown out the skeptics and the cynics.

If you stand with my husband; if you reach for what is possible and if you refuse to let this chance get away; we can begin building that better world in November.

Thank you.

For more information on this vile event — the “Folsom Street East” block party held June 21, 2009 in Manhattan — see our initial photo-story: “New York City Plays Host to Folsom-East Deviant Sex-Fest — Violating Lewdness Laws.” We will have more YouTube videos on Folsom Street East’s illegal public depravities; more background follows video:

This is footage from New York City “Folsom Street East” sadomasochistic “block party” in Manhattan (nudity is covered up) — shot by a New York volunteer for Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH). The event featured public perversions and nudity like this man tied to a St. Andrew’s cross — who, with genitals exposed, is being “electro-tortured” by another man wielding a remote control device.  Note the willing “victim” writhing in pain after his “torturer” clicks the remote. Such open public nudity and lewdness is a violation of several New York laws, yet police did nothing to intervene in this event.

Police later told AFTAH that they normally do not monitor private “block parties” ($10 gained entrance to Folsom East), but due to citizen complaints they will be more strict before issuing a permit to “Folsom Street East” organizers next year. Note: this NYC event is a copycat of the sadomasochism-celebrating “Folsom Street Fair” held annually in San Francisco. Information on contacting New York City officials, including police, is at the end of the video. — Peter LaBarbera

Related AFTAH stories: 

• “New York City Plays Host to Folsom-East Deviant Sex-Fest — Violating Lewdness Laws.”
• ‘’Tolerance Gone Wild’ in San Francisco as Cops Stand By Amidst (2007) Folsom Street Fair’s Public Perversions and Widespread Nudity”
• “Sodom & Gomorrah Would Blush: Homosexual Sadists Mock Jesus with Last Supper Take-Off in Poster for ‘Folsom Street Fair’”
• ‘Nudity Is Illegal’ but Public Nudity Was Everywhere at Folsom Street Fair (2008)
•  San Francisco’s Deviant Values: New (2009) Folsom Street Poster Mocks Family, Prop 8
• So Much for ‘Leather Pride’ — Folsom Organizers Try to Stop AFTAH from Exposing their Vile Event

WARNING: Crude language, inappropriate for children

TAKE ACTION: 1) e-mail this video to your elected Republican officials at the national (202-224-3121; www.congress.org), state and local level and urge them to reject the Log Cabin’s radical homosexual agenda (which includes joining with other “gay” groups in trying to use the courts to overturn California’s pro-traditional-marriage Prop 8 vote). 2) call or write Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele at chairman@gop.com or 202-863-8700; 2) Call or write Nettelhorst Elementary’s principal, Cindy Wulbert, at Cw1411@gmail.com or (773) 534-5810.

The Log Cabin Republicans, a homosexual activist group, fielded a float in Chicago’s annual “gay pride” parade on June 28. 2009 — with a couple of crude signs: “BIG DICKS, small government” and “A Strong Military Shoots Big Loads.” If that’s not bad enough, the “gay” parade — like others across the country — saw the participation of many young children, brought by their same-sex parents or gay-sympathetic adults. A Chicago school, Nettelhorst Elementary, participated semi-officially after parents rallied to have their children be part of the first-ever grade school contingent to march in the parade.

As you can see from the video, beyond the crude signage, the “pride” parade featured sexual images and even public nudity (a woman atop a float is shown flashing her bare breasts — covered up in this video). Homosexual activists claim that same-sex parenting and “gay” adoption are good for children. Then they take their impressionable kids to annual “gay pride” celebrations that feature erotic and perverted behavior and language that are clearly inappropriate for children. They can’t have it both ways.

This video was produced by Americans For Truth about Homosexuality.  At previous Chicago “gay pride” parades, AFTAH has witnessed public nudity and even a vile gay sex act between two men, which was allowed to take place on the street directly in front of a row of Chicago cops, who stood by and did nothing.

__________________________

Watch AFTAH’s other Chicago “gay pride” 2009 video:  VIDEO: Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart, Chicago ‘Gay Pride,’ and the Homosexual Cop-Haters

Related Log Cabin and “gay pride” stories:

• Homosexual Group ‘Log Cabin Republicans’ Has Measly 20,000 Members Nationwide
• Should Children Attend Lewd ‘Gay Pride’ Parades? LaBarbera Asks Biased Chicago Tribune Reporter
• [Illinois Family Institute - 2004:] Will Mayor Daley Again Allow Homosexuals to Commit Illegal Sex Acts on Chicago Streets at Upcoming ‘Gay Pride’ Parade?
• AFTAH Gives RNC Chief Michael Steele 20,000 Reasons NOT to Embrace Divisive Homosexual ‘Log Cabin Republican’ Agenda
• Tony Peraica, Christine Radogno Cozy Up to the Homosexual ‘Log Cabin Republicans’
• Log Cabin Republican Jamie Ensley Comes Out of his Bigot Closet
• Log Cabin Republicans Erase Photo of Boy-Seducing Predator Mark Foley from their Website
• Judy Baar Topinka Featured at Pro-Homosexual Log Cabin Republicans Fundraiser
• Public Nudity Tolerated as Angry Mob Assaults Peaceful Christians at Chicago ‘Gay Pride’ Parade
• San Diego School Superintendent: “Parents Don’t Have a Problem with Their Kids Being in Gay Pride Parade!”
• Coach Daubenmire Is Right: Christian Man, You Need to Observe a ‘Gay Pride’ Parade!
• San Diego City Councilman Blocks Public Display of Photos from “Gay Pride” Parade
• Ex-Log Cabin Republican Leader Takes over Pro-Homosexual-’Marriage’ Effort – Cal. Teachers Ass’n Pledges $1 Million to ‘No on [Prop] 8′

_________________________

TAKE ACTION: Call your Senators today to oppose the “Hate Crimes” bill, S 909;  then call your Congressman and your Senators and voice your opposition to homosexualizing the armed forces and ENDA — the Employment NonDiscrimination Act, which would compel small businesses to subsidize and reward immoral behavior. Call 202-224-3121 or 202-225-3121 or go to www.congress.org.  

_________________________

By Peter LaBarbera

So (President) Barack Obama is going to teach us (and by extension, God) a few things about the supposed morality of homosexual relationships? “Audacity” suddenly seems like too small a word for Mr. Obama. A few years ago this fellow was a back-bencher in Springfield, Illinois, unable to summon up the strength of character to vote for a bill designed to protect babies “born alive” through botched abortions. Now he’s President of the greatest and most blessed nation on earth and is so sure of his moral rectitude (or, conversely, cynical of divine absolutes) that he dismisses those “worn arguments and old attitudes” against homosexual behavior — you know, the ones rooted in Genesis in the Old Testament and Romans in the New.

Go HERE to watch the president’s elitist slap at faith-motivated Americans; start watching at the 1:00 minute mark of the speech to homosexual activists celebrating “gay pride month.” A transcript of the speech accompanies the Youtube video.

Who can quantify the arrogance of politicians, whose gargantuan egos lead them to make moral pronouncements that are, theologically and philosophically speaking, way “beyond their pay grade” (to paraphrase the strategically humble Obama)? This is not the first time Obama has played God: in the Democratic primary both he and Hillary Clinton — faced with the comment by Gen. Peter Pace that homosexual acts are immoral and incompatible with miliary service — simply declared that Gen. Pace was wrong because homosexuality is not immoral. Who knew that overturning five millennia of Judeo-Christian teachings was so simple?

Now, with the President using his bully pulpit to promote such ignoble and dubious causes as placing children in homes that are intentionally fatherless or motherless (he champions “gay adoption”), who could blame porn-users, compulsive liars, philanderers, and tax-cheats for lobbying the presumptive Theologian-in-Chief to declare that their misconduct is “not immoral”? (South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford could benefit right about now from a follow-up presidential proclamation declaring July ‘Adulterers Pride Month.’)

But the president is not acting alone. In fact, he’s following a fairly well-established Democratic script (and socially liberal Republicans are not far behind). Remember last year when Al Gore, one-time Southern Baptist, decided that — notwithstanding the inconvenient truth of God’s Word — two men or two women should be able to get “married”? Or, back in the eighties, when once-solid pro-lifer Rep. Dick Gephardt decided that unborn babies didn’t have a right to live after all? (By sheer coincidence, Gephardt’s cruel conversion came just in time for his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.)

We could fill a thousand books with similar Profiles in Cowardice of hollow, unprincipled and yet incredibly self-inflated men who transmit the adulation of politics into the idea that somehow they are above the laws of Nature and Nature’s God.  But there is no time for that now. Our task is to resist this one man who could sign legislation that injects open homosexuality into our military, helps destroy the meaning of marriage, compels small businessmen to subsidize homosexuality and gender confusion, and starts America down the path of criminalizing opposition to sexual sin.

Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews — indeed, even tradition-respecting atheists who share our opposition to privileging unnatural and changeable behavior in the law — stick to your worn arguments and old attitudes, which are far superior to today’s newfangled brand of perversion-based “civil rights.” None of you have anything to learn about the supposed morality of homosexual behavior from Mr. Obama. He may have the power to order a nuclear strike or change the balance of the Supreme Court, but as a mere man he has zero authority to repudiate God’s transcendent moral law on sex and marriage.

Go HERE to watch the president’s elitist slap at faith-motivated Americans with their “worn arguments and old attitudes”; start watching at the 1:00 minute mark of the speech to homosexual activists celebrating “gay pride month.” A transcript of the speech accompanies the Youtube video.

To view the president’s elitist slap at Americans who oppose homosexuality as adhering to “worn arguments and old attitudes,” start watching at the 1:00 mark of the YouTube video below of the June 29th White House reception with homosexual activists celebrating “gay pride month” (read AFTAH’s reaction to the speech HERE):

The following is the official White House transcript of Obama’s “LGBT”(lesbian, gay, bisexual transgender) speech June 29 (emphasis added):

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                      June 29, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT LGBT PRIDE MONTH RECEPTION

East Room

4:35 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Hello, everybody.  Hello, hello, hello.  (Applause.)  Hey!  Good to see you.  (Applause.)  I’m waiting for FLOTUS here.  FLOTUS always politics more than POTUS.

MRS. OBAMA:  No, you move too slow.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  It is great to see everybody here today and they’re just — I’ve got a lot of friends in the room, but there are some people I want to especially acknowledge.  First of all, somebody who helped ensure that we are in the White House, Steve Hildebrand.  Please give Steve a big round of applause.  (Applause.)  Where’s Steve?  He’s around here somewhere.  (Applause.)

The new chair of the Export-Import Bank, Fred Hochberg.  (Applause.)  Where’s Fred?  There’s Fred.  Good to see you, Fred.  Our Director of the Institute of Education Sciences at DOE, John Easton.  Where’s John?  (Applause.)  A couple of special friends — Bishop Gene Robinson.  Where’s Gene?  (Applause.)  Hey, Gene.  Ambassador Michael Guest is here.  (Applause.)  Ambassador Jim Hormel is here.  (Applause.)  Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown is here.  (Applause.)

All of you are here.  (Laughter and applause.)  Welcome to your White House.  (Applause.)  So –

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Somebody asked from the Lincoln Bedroom here.  (Laughter.)  You knew I was from Chicago too.  (Laughter.)

It’s good to see so many friends and familiar faces, and I deeply appreciate the support I’ve received from so many of you.  Michelle appreciates it and I want you to know that you have our support, as well.  (Applause.)  And you have my thanks for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard and care about their communities — and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.  (Applause.)

Now this struggle, I don’t need to tell you, is incredibly difficult, although I think it’s important to consider the extraordinary progress that we have made.  There are unjust laws to overturn and unfair practices to stop.  And though we’ve made progress, there are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; and who would deny you the rights that most Americans take for granted.  And I know this is painful and I know it can be heartbreaking.

And yet all of you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make but also by the power of the example that you set in your own lives — as parents and friends, as PTA members and leaders in the community.  And that’s important, and I’m glad that so many LGBT families could join us today.  (Applause.)  For we know that progress depends not only on changing laws but also changing hearts.  And that real, transformative change never begins in Washington.

(Cell phone “quacks.”)

Whose duck is back there?  (Laughter.)

MRS. OBAMA:  It’s a duck.

THE PRESIDENT:  There’s a duck quacking in there somewhere.  (Laughter.)  Where do you guys get these ring tones, by the way?  (Laughter.)  I’m just curious.  (Laughter.)

Indeed, that’s the story of the movement for fairness and equality — not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who’ve been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship; who’ve been told that the full blessings and opportunities of this country were closed to them.  It’s the story of progress sought by those who started off with little influence or power; by men and women who brought about change through quiet, personal acts of compassion and courage and sometimes defiance wherever and whenever they could.

That’s the story of a civil rights pioneer who’s here today, Frank Kameny, who was fired — (applause.)  Frank was fired from his job as an astronomer for the federal government simply because he was gay.  And in 1965, he led a protest outside the White House, which was at the time both an act of conscience but also an act of extraordinary courage.  And so we are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership.  (Applause.)

It’s the story of the Stonewall protests, which took place 40 years ago this week, when a group of citizens — with few options, and fewer supporters — decided they’d had enough and refused to accept a policy of wanton discrimination.  And two men who were at those protests are here today.  Imagine the journey that they’ve travelled.

It’s the story of an epidemic that decimated a community — and the gay men and women who came to support one another and save one another; and who continue to fight this scourge; and who demonstrated before the world that different kinds of families can show the same compassion and support in a time of need — that we all share the capacity to love.

So this story, this struggle, continues today — for even as we face extraordinary challenges as a nation, we cannot — and will not — put aside issues of basic equality.  (Applause.)  We seek an America in which no one feels the pain of discrimination based on who you are or who you love.

And I know that many in this room don’t believe that progress has come fast enough, and I understand that.  It’s not for me to tell you to be patient, any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half century ago.

But I say this:  We have made progress and we will make more.  And I want you to know that I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I’ve made, but by the promises that my administration keeps.  And by the time you receive — (applause.)  We’ve been in office six months now.  I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration.  (Applause.)

Now, while there is much more work to do, we can point to important changes we’ve already put in place since coming into office.  I’ve signed a memorandum requiring all agencies to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as current law allows.  And these are benefits that will make a real difference for federal employees and Foreign Service Officers, who are so often treated as if their families don’t exist.  And I’d like to note that one of the key voices in helping us develop this policy is John Berry, our director of the Office of Personnel Management, who is here today.  And I want to thank John Berry.  (Applause.)

I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination — (applause) — to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country.  Now, I want to add we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides.  And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law.  I’ve made that clear.

I’m also urging Congress to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, which will guarantee the full range of benefits, including health care, to LGBT couples and their children.  (Applause.)  My administration is also working hard to pass an employee non-discrimination bill and hate crimes bill, and we’re making progress on both fronts.  (Applause.)  Judy and Dennis Shepard, as well as their son Logan, are here today.  I met with Judy in the Oval Office in May — (applause) — and I assured her and I assured all of you that we are going to pass an inclusive hate crimes bill into law, a bill named for their son Matthew.  (Applause.)

In addition, my administration is committed to rescinding the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status.  (Applause.)  The Office of Management and Budget just concluded a review of a proposal to repeal this entry ban, which is a first and very big step towards ending this policy.  And we all know that HIV/AIDS continues to be a public health threat in many communities, including right here in the District of Columbia.  And that’s why this past Saturday, on National HIV Testing Day, I was proud once again to encourage all Americans to know their status and get tested the way Michelle and I know our status and got tested.  (Applause.)

And finally, I want to say a word about “don’t ask, don’t tell.”  As I said before — I’ll say it again — I believe “don’t ask, don’t tell” doesn’t contribute to our national security.  (Applause.)  In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security.  (Applause.)

Now, my administration is already working with the Pentagon and members of the House and the Senate on how we’ll go about ending this policy, which will require an act of Congress.

Someday, I’m confident, we’ll look back at this transition and ask why it generated such angst, but as Commander-in-Chief, in a time of war, I do have a responsibility to see that this change is administered in a practical way and a way that takes over the long term.  That’s why I’ve asked the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a plan for how to thoroughly implement a repeal.

I know that every day that passes without a resolution is a deep disappointment to those men and women who continue to be discharged under this policy — patriots who often possess critical language skills and years of training and who’ve served this country well.  But what I hope is that these cases underscore the urgency of reversing this policy not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because it is essential for our national security.

Now, even as we take these steps, we must recognize that real progress depends not only on the laws we change but, as I said before, on the hearts we open.  For if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that there are good and decent people in this country who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters — not yet.

That’s why I’ve spoken about these issues not just in front of you, but in front of unlikely audiences — in front of African American church members, in front of other audiences that have traditionally resisted these changes.  And that’s what I’ll continue to do so.  That’s how we’ll shift attitudes.  That’s how we’ll honor the legacy of leaders like Frank and many others who have refused to accept anything less than full and equal citizenship.

Now, 40 years ago, in the heart of New York City at a place called the Stonewall Inn, a group of citizens, including a few who are here today, as I said, defied an unjust policy and awakened a nascent movement.

It was the middle of the night.  The police stormed the bar, which was known for being one of the few spots where it was safe to be gay in New York.  Now, raids like this were entirely ordinary.  Because it was considered obscene and illegal to be gay, no establishments for gays and lesbians could get licenses to operate.  The nature of these businesses, combined with the vulnerability of the gay community itself, meant places like Stonewall, and the patrons inside, were often the victims of corruption and blackmail.

Now, ordinarily, the raid would come and the customers would disperse.  But on this night, something was different.  There are many accounts of what happened, and much has been lost to history, but what we do know is this:  People didn’t leave.  They stood their ground.  And over the course of several nights they declared that they had seen enough injustice in their time.  This was an outpouring against not just what they experienced that night, but what they had experienced their whole lives.  And as with so many movements, it was also something more:  It was at this defining moment that these folks who had been marginalized rose up to challenge not just how the world saw them, but also how they saw themselves.

As we’ve seen so many times in history, once that spirit takes hold there is little that can stand in its way.  (Applause.)  And the riots at Stonewall gave way to protests, and protests gave way to a movement, and the movement gave way to a transformation that continues to this day.  It continues when a partner fights for her right to sit at the hospital bedside of a woman she loves.  It continues when a teenager is called a name for being different and says, “So what if I am?”  It continues in your work and in your activism, in your fight to freely live your lives to the fullest.

In one year after the protests, a few hundred gays and lesbians and their supporters gathered at the Stonewall Inn to lead a historic march for equality.  But when they reached Central Park, the few hundred that began the march had swelled to 5,000.  Something had changed, and it would never change back.

The truth is when these folks protested at Stonewall 40 years ago no one could have imagined that you — or, for that matter, I — (laughter) — would be standing here today.  (Applause.)  So we are all witnesses to monumental changes in this country.  That should give us hope, but we cannot rest.  We must continue to do our part to make progress — step by step, law by law, mind by changing mind.  And I want you to know that in this task I will not only be your friend, I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a President who fights with you and for you.

Thanks very much, everybody.  God bless you.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  It’s a little stuffed in here.  We’re going to open — we opened up that door.  We’re going to walk this way, and then we’re going to come around and we’ll see some of you over there, all right?  (Laughter.)  But out there.  (Laughter.)

But thank you very much, all, for being here.  Enjoy the White House.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

END                4:53 P.M. EDT

Tom Dart, Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, shows his support for the homosexual agenda by fielding a float and marching in the 2009 Chicago Gay Pride Parade (June 28, 2009). Ten minutes later in the parade, a radical leftist homosexual organization holds up a banner that reads, “Gay Pride Means Fight Cops.” Note that the faces of the young men holding up the cop-hating banner are covered with Intifada-like headdresses.  More description is after the jump and under the video ….

… This footage was shot by Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, as we make our belated entrance into the world of YouTube. As is typical, the 2009 Chicago “Pride” parade featured participants violating the Chicago Public Morals Law, e.g., a presumed transsexual “female” baring his/her breasts riding atop a float block after block on Halsted St (much like I witnessed at the 2007 Chicago “Pride” march). Keep in mind that there were many children at the parade — and this year children from Chicago’s Nettelhorst Elementary School actually participated in the homosexual parade at the request of their parents.

Also, this footage of Sheriff Dart’s float was shot directly in front of a 24/7 homosexual bathhouse called “Steamworks,” (at 3246 Halsted in Boystown, Chicago), where men go for anonymous, deviant sex with other men. Perhaps Dart should focus less on “gay pride” and more on enforcing decency laws — and closing down Chicago perversion centers like Steamworks that  facilitate the spread STDs by enabling reckless homosexual promiscuity. Call Sheriff Dart at 312-603-6444, or e-mail: sheriff@cookcountysheriff.org. Thanks for taking action. — Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.com