The following is excerpted from an online appeal by pro-family author and advocate, Dr. Michael Brown to President Obama, in response to Obama signing an Executive Order designed to advance “gay rights”–and which is bereft of a strong religious exemptions as requested by a coalition of religious leaders. Dr. Brown–whose book A Queer Thing Happened to America is essential reading for those hoping to understand the far-reaching LGBT agenda–will be the keynote speaker at AFTAH’s banquet October 25th at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, Illinois. This article first appeared in Charisma magazine.
President Obama, You Have Crossed a Dangerous, Unprecedented Line
9:00AM EDT, 7/22/2014 Michael Brown, Charisma, In the Line of Fire
President Barack Obama on Monday signed an executive order banning “discrimination” by federal contractors against LGBT people, allowing for no religious exemptions of any kind.
Dear Mr. President,
I write to you today as a concerned citizen of our great nation, standing as a witness against your historic actions on the morning of July 21, 2014, actions which I hope you will one day repudiate with deep remorse and regret.
I am referring, of course, to your signing an executive order Monday banning “discrimination” by federal contractors against LGBT people, allowing for no religious exemptions of any kind.
This was an outrageous act of discrimination against religion in the name of anti-discrimination—an act of bullying people of faith in the name of the prevention of bullying.
How can you, as a man who professes to be a person of faith and a follower of Jesus, throw religious Americans—in particular Christians—under the bus?
How can you attempt to force Christians, Jews, Muslims and others to violate fundamental aspects of their moral codes in order to appease a small but powerful special interest group, one that is not, in fact, suffering daily economic hardship by being fired from their jobs because of their sexual orientation or expression?
Have you forgotten entirely that our nation was founded on the concept of religious freedom?
Barber: Christians Will Engage in Civil Disobedience against Unjust ‘Sexual Orientation’ Non-Discrimination LawsJuly 22nd, 2014
I have two observations about this excellent piece by my friend, Barbwire.com founder, and AFTAH Board Member Matt Barber: 1) I wish all Christians could possess Matt’s resolve in defending Truth; and 2) only a tiny minority of believers understand what is coming down the pike, persecution-wise, from the combination of treating homosexuality as a “civil right” and the court-imposed legalization of “gay marriage.” This is Big Government imposing immorality on us all, and we must fight it with great vigilance. – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org
The Coming Christian Revolt
By Matt Barber, July 21, 2014
From behind a smoking sniper rifle high atop his ivory tower peers the secular “progressive.” He surveys his many victims, strewn across the American landscape below and mockingly sneers, “War on Christianity? What war on Christianity?”
He then resumes shooting, all the while insisting that those uncooperative Christians who scatter for cover behind the Word of God and the U.S. Constitution somehow suffer from a “persecution complex” (the baker, the photographer, the florist, the innkeeper, the Christian school administrator, etc.).
Though there are many, it is plain for all to see that abortion and “sexual liberation” remain the two principal theaters in the ongoing culture war battlefront.
To fully advance the causes of radical feminism, abortion-on-demand, unfettered sexual license, gay marriage and the like, the pagan left must do away with religious free exercise altogether. Under the guise of “anti-discrimination,” Christians today face discrimination at unprecedented levels.
Let’s see if we can make this abundantly clear. Christians, true Christians—regenerate, Bible-believing Christians who strive their level best to maintain fidelity to the word of God and honor His commands—will not—indeed cannot—participate in, approve of, facilitate or encourage certain behaviors deemed by the Holy Scriptures to be immoral or sinful.
We at Americans For Truth certainly concur with Tony Perkins: the Democrats are playing a dangerous game by pandering to special interest groups (in this case radical feminists and homosexual activists) who seek to trample over Americans’ religious liberty and freedom of conscience. – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 16, 2014
Conscience Crushing Bill Demonstrates Senate Democrats’ Wrong Priorities
July 16, 2014
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Family Research Council (FRC) urged the U.S. Senate to reject legislation proposed by Senate Democrats that would overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby/Conestoga Wood ruling. The decision upheld religious liberty and protected the conscience rights of those family businesses that object to being forced to pay for drugs that have the potential to kill an unborn child.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins made the following comments:
Slippery Slope: Austrailian Judge Says Incest May No Longer Be a Taboo, Citing Acceptance of HomosexualityJuly 11th, 2014
“If this was the 1950s…they would say it’s unnatural for a man to be interested in another man or a man being interested in a boy,” judge says
The slippery slope of sexual perversion and sin continues to yield stunning departures from healthy, Judeo-Christian morality. The following excerpt appeared in the U.K. Daily Telegraph July 10, 2014:
A judge in Australia has been criticised after saying incest may no longer be a taboo and that the community may now accept consensual sex between adult siblings.
Judge Garry Neilson, from the district court in the state of New South Wales, likened incest to homosexuality, which was once regarded as criminal and “unnatural” but is now widely accepted.
He said incest was now only a crime because it may lead to abnormalities in offspring but this rationale was increasingly irrelevant because of the availability of contraception and abortion.
“A jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now ‘available,’ not having [a] sexual partner,” the judge said.
“If this was the 1950s and you had a jury of 12 men there, which is what you’d invariably have, they would say it’s unnatural for a man to be interested in another man or a man being interested in a boy. Those things have gone.”
Judge Neilson made the comments during the trial of a brother charged with raping his younger sister. The man has pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting his sister when she was 10 or 11 years old in 1973 or 1974 but has pleaded not guilty to charges relating to sex they had in 1981, when she was 18 and he was 26.
“By that stage they are both mature adults,” the judge said.
“The complainant has been sexually awoken, shall we say, by having two relationships with men and she had become ‘free’ when the second relationship broke down. The only thing that might change that is the fact that they were a brother and sister but we’ve come a long way from the 1950s – when the position of the English Common Law was that sex outside marriage was not lawful.” …[continued]
[Continue reading at the Telegraph website HERE.]
The following open letter to Michael Sam–who has gained fame as the first openly homosexual NFL draftee–is adapted from a printed version written and distributed by AFTAH Board Member John McCartney, who has devoted many years to the critical study of homosexuality. I recommend reading this CDC report on HIV and Black MSM (men who have sex with men)–though it is tinged with politically-correct bias–for more background on this aspect of HIV crisis linked to homosexual behavior.–Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH
An Open Letter to Michael Sam
Michael, do we have to tell you that, especially with your current publicity, you are a role model because of your athletic prowess, but since “coming out” you are also modeling a lifestyle that the cost for those living it, has been unpublicized but appalling—as it has for society. The troubling fact is minorities are suffering most and in growing numbers. The evidence:
Secondary to the toll in pain and death among MSM is the drain on U.S. medical and financial resources; for example, anti-viral drugs, which can prolong MSM life about 20 years, cost over $24,000 per year. They do prolong life but must be taken scrupulously or the MSM becomes infectious. To treat an HIV/AIDS victim costs from $400,000 to $600,000 from infection to death. In total, the HIV/AIDS epidemic costs the country about $5 billion per year, says CDC Director Dr. Tom Freiden.
Believe it or not, no one is born “gay”; molestation, emotional deprivation, parental or peer rejection, or other traumatic factors can foster same-sex attraction–but many men and women have managed it, diminished it, or eliminated it altogether. [See these heartwarming ex-"gay" testimonies.] Many accomplished this through Reparative Therapy and counseling, despite the relentless, unwarranted condemnation of and campaign against both by self-serving “gay” activists.
What we hope for from you, Michael, is that you don’t make your feelings, well-publicized as they have been, your claim to fame. Your achievements on the football field will earn you a legacy you can be proud of; your “coming out” as one celebrating homosexuality as normative can earn you only regret, as well as notoriety among millions of us.
President, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH)
John J. McCartney, Jr.
AFTAH Board Member
Why Are Liberal ‘Gay’ Activists Freaking Out over a Contraception Case – Hobby Lobby – and Should They Be Worried?July 3rd, 2014
Court’s defense of religious liberty for profit-making companies could help Christian small businessmen oppressed by “gay rights” laws
By Peter LaBarbera
It’s easy to understand why hard-core feminists with their frenzied, overblown “War on Women” rhetoric would be outraged by the Supreme Court upholding Hobby Lobby’s right as a Christian-run corporation not to be forced to provide abortifacients to its employees through an Obama-care mandate. (See Hillary’s misinformation on the decision HERE.) But why are liberal “gay” activists freaking out over the Hobby Lobby ruling?
The case was never about denying women birth control, but you wouldn’t know that from the “reporting” by liberal media and hyperventilating “progressive” bloggers. Hobby Lobby still provides 16 forms of birth control as a health benefit to its employees, but its founders—along with another Christian-owned corporation, Conestoga Wood Specialists—sued HHS over being forced to provide four contraceptive methods that could terminate a fertilized egg.
Hobby Lobby’s founders, David and Barbara Green, are committed Christians who believe that life begins at conception and should be protected. To quote the Court decision, “Hobby Lobby’s statement of purpose commits the Greens to ‘[h]onoring the Lord in all [they] do by operating the company in a manner consistent with Biblical principles.’” So strong is the Greens’ commitment to Jesus Christ that they have lost countless millions of dollars in profits over the years by closing their 500 craft stores nationwide on Sunday.
Now, one would think that obtaining cheap, subsidized contraception would be low on the priority list for homosexuals, seeing that two men or two women by themselves cannot produce a child. Nevertheless, Big Gay Inc is in a tizzy over the Supreme Court decision—because Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby isn’t really about contraceptives but rather whether Americans like the Greens will be free to live out their religious convictions.
Immediately after the decision, feminists flew into a rage, circulating crude versions of Justice Ginsburg’s dissent and distortions about women being denied birth control by their “male bosses.” Too bad most Americans will never read the actual Hobby Lobby decision—which lays out two diametrically opposed, competing visions about freedom of conscience and the role of government in these United States.
Freedom of conscience vs. Big Government
On the side of preserving and even expanding Americans’ religious liberty were five judges: Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. In his concurring opinion Kennedy writes:
On the other side—of Big Government overriding citizens’ religious beliefs, restricting conscience exemptions to federal mandates, and putting federal power behind expanded access to entitlements–were Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer and Kagan. In fact, Ginsburg spends nearly two pages in her dissent [see pp. 24-25] defending the idea that Obama-care’s provision of subsidies for IUD’s (intrauterine devices) –one of the four contraceptives resisted by Hobby Lobby as a potential abortifacient—is a “compelling government interest.”
As much as Ginsburg believes the majority’s “immoderate” reading of Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is too broad, hers is too narrow: she ends by arguing that exemptions under the RFRA should be limited to explicitly religious organizations—leaving for-profit Christian businessmen like the Greens unprotected.
The bigger government gets–in both its “social justice” mission and the amount of goodies it gives out as “entitlements”—the greater the threat to Americans’ right to freely exercise their faith. This is precisely why homosexual activists are nervous about Hobby Lobby’s victory. If the nation’s highest court grants that even very large “closely held” family businesses like Hobby Lobby (which has more than 13,000 employees) possess a religious liberty claim under RFRA, then surely small family businesses like Elane Photography in New Mexico—owned by Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin—should have the right not to use their creative talents to serve homosexual “weddings,” which violate their Christian faith.
The following is taken from Gary Bauer’s daily “End of Day” e-mail sent out today (July 1) through his organization, Campaign for Working Families. Gary has long been one of the best thinkers and most informative writers in the pro-life and pro-family movement. Few conservatives leaders can write like Gary (or hire someone to ghost-write like him!), so if you are conservative or pro-family, I guarantee you will not regret signing up for his daily e-newsletter HERE.
Regarding Chris Christie and the Hobby Lobby SCOTUS decision, isn’t it odd that the outspoken (Republican) New Jersey governor has the audacity to play God by proclaiming that homosexuality not a sin as he signed a freedom-crushing ex-”gay” change therapy ban last year–yet he couldn’t muster up the courage to praise a critical victory for religious freedom at the Supreme Court? I’m no fan of the liberal Huffington Post, and their women-as-victims spin on Hobby Lobby is obnoxious, but they got it at least half right in this piece on Christie’s sudden shyness and craven bully pulpit politics. – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH
The Day After
By Gary Bauer
The left is in full spin mode after the Supreme Court struck down Obamacare’s abortion mandate. Please tell the women in your life that nothing happened yesterday that will deny them access to contraception.
The issue in this case was not contraception. Let me remind folks once again that Hobby Lobby’s insurance policy covered 16 out of 20 forms of contraception. But the owners of Hobby Lobby drew the line at the last four methods, which they believed could cause abortions. And during oral arguments, the Obama Administration actually claimed that it could force companies to pay for abortions.
The issue in this case was individual religious liberty. Consider this statement from Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion:
Yesterday’s ruling was a major victory won by a disturbingly slim margin of one vote. Now comes the hard part of winning the debate, which will be difficult in no small measure because of the cowardice of establishment Republicans.
Law banning pro-heterosexual Reparative Therapy for minors now likely to go into effect
June 30, 2014
Washington, DC—The Supreme Court passed on Liberty Counsel’s petition regarding California’s ban on change therapy in the case of Pickup v. Brown. Two lower court judges and two separate appellate panels have issued conflicting opinions upholding and blocking the ban on change therapy. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction pending appeal, followed by a three-judge panel that upheld the law. That panel then agreed to continue the injunction blocking the law until he Supreme Court had a chance to weigh in on the case. Today’s decision by the Supreme Court to pass on the case means the proceeding will go back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which could lift the injunction and allow the law to go into effect.
The California law was the first to restrict licensed counselors from offering, and minor clients and their parents from receiving, any counsel to change unwanted same-sex attractions, behaviors, or identity.
“I am deeply saddened for the families we represent and for the thousands of children that our professional clients counsel, many of whom developed these unwanted attractions because of abuse of a pedophile. The minors we represent do not want to act on same-sex attractions, nor do they want to engage in such behavior. They are greatly benefiting from this counseling. Their grades have gone up, their self-esteem has improved, and their relationships at home are much improved,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “These children have been victimized twice – first by the likes of Jerry Sandusky, and second by legislators and judges who have essentially barged into their private therapy rooms and told them that they must pursue their unwanted and dangerous same-sex sexual attractions and behavior,” said Staver.
Want to See Every New AFTAH Article?
If you don't want to miss anything posted on the Americans For Truth website, sign up for our "Feedblitz" service that gives you a daily email of every new article that we post. (This service DOES NOT replace the regular email list.) To sign up for the Feedblitz service, click here.
|Copyright © 2006-2011 Americans for Truth. All Rights Reserved.|