Robert Oscar Lopez. See his other articles on American Thinker. Also see his blog, English Manif.

“The gay movement is trying to ban homosexuals from getting help so they can turn toward heterosexuality.”–Robert Oscar Lopez

Folks, Robert Oscar Lopez is a brilliant and original thinker who is unafraid to go where many other Christians and conservatives will not, taking on emerging “political correctness” on homosexuality within the Body of Christ. Here Lopez deals with Christian leaders who condemn ex-“gay” therapy (he uses “conversion therapy,” a term we avoid since it has been politicized by Big LGBTQ), and the bad effect this has on homosexual strugglers who truly want to “pursue intimacy with the opposite sex.” Which is to say: they do not want to retain any kind of same-sex identity, the maintenance of which, as supposed “gay Christians,” is all the rage these days in some Christian circles (see the “Revoice” controversy). Visit Lopez’s blog, English Manif, and keep coming back; you will not be disappointed.  — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

_______________________

Christians Who Oppose Conversion Therapy Need a Reality Check

By Robert Oscar Lopez

This article first appeared in American Thinker, Sept. 13, 2018

To be loving does not mean to be gullible.  Jesus Christ mentions that we will come across dishonest people, especially among those who have prestige (or are seeking it).  We should love people, but that does not mean we should let them take advantage of us.  Or fool us.  Or trick us.

In that spirit, I want Rosaria Butterfield, Sam Allberry, and Jackie Hill Perry to answer a simple yes-or-no question.  No long filibustering paragraphs.  No detours into extensive complaints about what other Christians are supposedly doing.  No lifeline block-quotes from Augustine.  Just yes or no.  Here:

Folks, to paraphrase the Gipper (Ronald Reagan) in his famous 1980 debate quip to Walter Mondale, “There you go again, Mr. Zuckerberg.” Coming after one petty Facebook censorship takedown of an AFTAH FB post [see it here], the social media giant just informed me that “You can’t post, comment or use [Facebook] Messenger for 30 days. This is because 2 of your posts go against our Community Standards on hate speech, and because you previously posted something that didn’t follow our standards.”

This is one the offending posts, which appeared on both my own (“Peter LaBarbera”) Facebook page as well as my “Americans For Truth About Homosexuality” page. Note that I had blocked out the indecency and labelled it “Wrong”–which I suspect is my biggest Facebook “crime.” So now it is “hateful” to call out one of the most perverted deviant sex (sadomasochistic) celebrations in the world (you know: men calling themselves sex “pigs,” etc., as: wrong, gross, twisted and, yes, satanic?

No explanation. No defense of their worldview. Just the same old “hate” mantra. The “techie” Left, super self-righteous and all about power and (thought) control, is killing free speech and reasoned discourse in this nation, and conservatives are still struggling to figure out how to fight it. More photos below after the jump. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

Flanders sends emails claiming mugshot from assault arrest against teen boy is “copyrighted” property; two gullible corporations buy it and close down AFTAH sites

Media Release September 17, 2018
Contact: Peter LaBarbera, americansfortruth@gmail; 312-324-3787

A “Copyrighted” Mugshot? This mugshot photo of homosexual activist and registered sex offender Adam Flanders is from a November 24, 2006 arrest in Maine on assault charges against his underage boyfriend. Flanders–who later held a knife to the neck of the boy, then 16, to threaten the boy’s dad–is on the registered Sex Offenders list in Maine and California after pleading guilty in 2008 for  “Sexual Abuse of a Minor” for having sex with an underage boy. Flanders says he is the “sole copyright owner” of the photo–and he used that absurd claim to threaten AFTAH’s web service provider, FirstLight Fiber, which bowed to his demands. The photo above was evidently taken after Flanders was arrested on assault charges on November 24, 2006, according to his Criminal History Record as obtained from the Maine State Bureau of Identification. (See page 2 for Assault arrest apparently associated with this “11-25-06” mugshot.) NOTE: Flanders’ claim that the above mugshot photo exposes his Social Security number is also bogus. The numbers on the black card are NOT his SSN number; the information on his jail wristband is not legible. Perhaps that explains why this same photo remains on MassResistance’s site despite Flanders’ fanatical attempts over several years to have it and other material removed.

CHICAGO, IL—The entire website for Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH.org) was shut down for more than two weeks beginning August 24 after a convicted homosexual sex offender, Adam Flanders, threatened a lawsuit against FirstLight Fiber, the Internet Service Provider (ISP) for AFTAH’s web host company–claiming his mugshot photo from a 2006 assault arrest against a minor boy was “copyrighted” material.

Flanders, a homosexual activist, is a registered sex offender in both Maine and California, where he now lives. He pleaded guilty in 2008 to “Sexual Abuse of a Minor” involving a boy aged 14 or 15. He also admitted to engaging in homosexual sex with his then-14-year-old boyfriend when he (Flanders) was 18–in a 2007 public letter exposing a Maine “gay youth” club. Later, Flanders sought to retract the letter and demanded that web sites take it down.

Flanders has a long history of making such litigious and mendacious threats containing absurd, exaggerated and sometimes nonsensical claims against pro-family leaders and websites that have exposed his past criminal offenses and other actions.

The mugshot photo in question can be viewed at upper right. AFTAH will not take it down because it is obviously in the public domain and not “owned” by Flanders. (Mugshots are routinely used in news stories and political ads.) Note also that after years of Flanders’ harassing threats and even a $1 million “defamation” lawsuit against pro-family hero Brian Camenker and his organization, MassResistance (see below), the identical Flanders 2006 mugshot photo printed by AFTAH remains posted throughout the MR site. Had Flanders’ accusations any legal merit, would Camenker leave them up, risking further ordeals?

Weighing legal options

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth, and Jared Heath, CEO of Altha Technology, AFTAH’s web host company, are weighing their legal options against Flanders and FirstLight Fiber, the ISP that capitulated to his spurious email demand. Another ISP, HostGator, took down an AFTAH temporary site (see below); that site, “Americans For Truth Censored,” remains down.

“Flanders’ reckless actions and the ISPs that bowed to them have caused me and Jared Heath, the ex-Marine who runs AFTAH’s web host company, severe emotional and mental distress. They also have caused us significant financial harm and damage to our reputations,” said LaBarbera. “I know Flanders wants to erase his crimes from the web, especially his Sexual Abuse of a Minor conviction, but we will never give in to his intimidation tactics.”

Internet Bully: This vicious and venomous image was created by Maine “gay” activist Adam Flanders to bully Christian singer/songwriter Paulie Heath and intimidate the Heath family. Paulie’s husband, pro-family hero Mike Heath, was head of the Christian Civic League of Maine at the time. See below.

LaBarbera also called on Flanders to privately and publicly apologize to Paulie Heath, Jared’s mother, for the horrific and demented web-bullying graphic he created in 2005 cruelly distorting her visage (see below).

Flanders held knife at teen boyfriend’s throat

As this 2013 U.S. District Court document reveals (p.2), Flanders was arrested again in 2007 for another, more violent crime involving the same boy, now 16. According to U.S. Magistrate Judge Margaret Kravchuk’s decision, Flanders knifed the father of the teen boy lover after violating a court protection order to stay away from the boy. In that altercation, when the boy’s father came to rescue his son, Flanders held a knife at the boy’s throat, and knifed both the father and the boy in the altercation.

FirstLight took down the entire AFTAH website on August 24, 2018, three days after receiving an “abuse” complaint demanding “removal of copyrighted content pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).” AFTAH site has been up since September 10 using a separate IP address, but Flanders is continually working to take it down, and is again threatening legal action against LaBarbera and Heath.

FirstLight’s reckless takedown of an entire pro-family website containing thousands of articles–based on a single email containing outlandish assertions by a homosexual activist trying to erase his criminal history–demonstrates the growing crisis of anti-conservative censorship in Corporate America.

As AFTAH was reeling from Flanders’ harassment, it learned that Facebook had demanded that the AFTAH Facebook page take down a harmless post involving another homosexual activist, Phillip Picardi. The post, shown HERE and below, shows Picardi taking a selfie of him kissing another man as he defiantly gives the finger to critics upset at his defense of an article promoting anal sex in Teen Vogue, a magazine for young girls. Picardi is digital editor of Teen Vogue.

The following is a sample of Flanders’ previous outrageous and litigious stunts:

Queer Role Models for Kids? A self-styled “drag queen” (this is a man) holds a copy of “Princess Boy,” a “children’s” picture book promoting gender confusion about a boy who “likes to wear his princess tiara,” etc. This introduction from the opening page of the “Drag Queen Story Hour” website reads: “Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is just what it sounds like–drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores. DQSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models. In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restriction and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real.”

_____________________________________

Folks, one of the dirtiest secrets of the homosexual-bisexual-transgender (aka “gay”) activist movement is that it has been sexualizing and corrupting children, in some form or another, from the beginning. Back when homosexualist power was a tiny sliver of what it is today, LGB(T) activists tried to hide that element of their agenda. But now that they dominate society at the elite level, with zero accountability from the media, their contempt for the innocence of even very young children is “out of the closet.”

For the “T” lobby these unconscionable Story Hours are a “three-fer”: they get to mock real women, indoctrinate innocent, impressionable children, and mainstream “queer” deviance all at the same time! But the main motivation, it seems, is for pro-LGBTQueer parents (especially homosexuals themselves) to transmit their decadent values to their children. Thus “gay parenting” serves as a catalyst for the wider corruption of kids in the culture. My friend Gina Miller ably tackles this disturbing new brand of perversion-promotion below. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

__________________________

Standing Against ‘Drag Queen Story Hour’

By Gina Miller, first published Sept. 14, 2018

Last Saturday, I was part of a protest against a “Drag Queen Story Hour” being held at a public library in Mobile, Alabama. These events, which are happening in libraries and public schools all across the nation, are one of the newer weapons in the homofascist arsenal, and they target little children from three to eight years old.

The events are grotesque spectacles of men dressed garishly as “women” reading “children’s” books (that include feminist, homosexual and “transgender” themed stories) to little ones
whose parents foolishly choose to bring them. A December 2016 column by a writer for the DailyWire reports that the “Drag Queen Story Hours” were spawned by homosexual and feminist groups in New York and San Francisco, in response to Donald Trump’s election in 2016.

Below is a graphic about the recent act of Facebook censorship against Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s (AFTAH) FB page. Our commentary at right was not a part of the original deleted post. The circled portion is Facebook’s notification to AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera; it reads:

“Only you can see this post because it goes against our standards on hate speech.”

Honestly, I don’t know what triggered the left-leaning techies at Facebook (or that FB “algorithm” we keep hearing about in the news): was it the use of the word “queer,” even though I was just paraphrasing a widely used slogan by the homosexual group “Queer Nation”? (Note: almost all major LGBTQ groups and websites use that word.) Or was it that I covered up the indecent “gay kiss”?

Either way, FB’s oppressive application of leftist “hate” politics is deeply troubling. The Soviet Thought Police had nothing on these morally-challenged techies.

How can conservatives go on in the most popular social media platforms under these conditions? Talk to almost any pro-family advocate on Facebook who defends biblical sexuality and you will find similar stories of heavy-handed and often petty acts of FB censorship. It has happened to us before. Perhaps it’s time to break up these leftist de facto monopolies.–Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

Facebook puts Bible-and-homosexuality scholar in “jail” after post critical of conference recognizing homosexuals as “sexual minority”

Robert Gagnon

Folks, my friend Robert Gagnon, the world’s foremost authority on the Bible and homosexuality, last week penned this critique of the Revoice conference going on right now in St. Louis. Revoice aims to recognize and celebrate LGBTQ-identified celibate Christians as a “sexual minority” in the Church. It has been widely challenged by orthodox Christians for undermining Scriptural truth; see this article on Revoice’s speakers.

After publishing his piece on Facebook, Gagnon was was put in “Facebook jail” for 24 hours–the second time this has happened to him in recent weeks. That’s very troubling, as is the fact I and several other Christians were BANNED from attending Revoice after we were “checked out” by organizers.

Gagnon wrote in an email:

“I have been blocked again for 24 hours from Facebook, with a warning that the next time I am blocked it will be for 3 days. They blocked me for a mild post expressing concern about the upcoming Revoice Conference (pasted below). Could the Revoice people have complained about me?…”

We will be following this story very closely, as I share the belief of others that Revoice is the LGBTQ activist camel’s nose under the tent of the evangelical Christian church. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

______________________________

Concerns with the upcoming Revoice Conference and Spiritual Friendship Folk

By Robert A. J. Gagnon

While I am glad for the fact that persons at the upcoming Revoice Conference (July 26-28, St. Louis, in a PCA venue) and those who align with the “Spiritual Friendship” program want to refrain from engaging in same-sex intercourse and thereby uphold this part of the orthodox witness, I have seven consequential concerns about their views.

1. Inadequate engagement with the need for “renewal of the mind” as regards homosexual desires. Is there any asking of: “What is the false narrative that gives these impulses particular strength? Why am I viewing a person of the same sex as a sexual complement or counterpart to my own sex? Why am I aroused by the distinctive sexual features of my own sex, by what I already have? Am I thinking of myself as only half of my own sex? What kind of strategies for renewing my mind can I use to counter this false narrative beyond ‘washed and waiting’?” Instead, the benefits of a generalized “gay” perspective (minus the sex) are celebrated or lifted up. Even if one’s attractions may not change with such an evaluation, they can be disempowered by exposing the lie that lies behind attempts to gratify same-sex desire or (for “transgenders,” so-called) to deny one’s biological sex altogether. There is more to be addressed here than refraining from homosexual sex.

Schools Are LGBTQ Propaganda Zones: Here is part of a supposed history lesson by the homosexual activist group GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network). It is false and misleading: homosexual “marriages” were not common nor legal in Roman society, and same-sex unions were often ridiculed, according  to (pro-“gay marriage”) classicist Michael Fontaine, who writes: “This confusion brings us back to Roman law. Marriage in ancient Rome was forever aimed at producing legitimate children for the state. Other sexual relationships were surely common, but a gay partnership was not one of those the state dignified with legal recognition.” Source of graphic: GLSEN online report, “LGBTQ History.” Click to enlarge.

Folks, this is from pro-family education advocate Donna Garner, a Texas-based conservative hero. She writes about a new Republican National Committee (RNC) resolution supporting parental rights in sexuality education (sex-ed). Of course, as with all political party resolutions, they’re not worth too much if the politicians ignore them (as GOP pols are wont to do, for example, their failure to steadfastly resist the advances of Big LGBTQ). Congrats to RNC Committeewoman Cynthia Dunbar and all those who helped to push this common-sense resolution through. —Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

Donna Garner writes:

_______________________

Landmark Resolution to Protect Children from Unsuitable Content — Passed by Republican National Committee

July 22, 2018 by Donna Garner Education Policy Commentator

From Cynthia Dunbar, Republican National Committeewoman

7.20.18

A landmark Resolution supporting parental rights was unanimously adopted this week by the Republican National Committee. Cynthia Dunbar, National Committeewoman for Virginia and sponsor of the Resolution stated, “I’m thrilled we were able to get this Resolution adopted. This should not be a partisan issue. Parents everywhere deserve the right to know what their children are being taught and have an opportunity to consent to it. Passage of this Resolution is a huge victory and will hopefully serve as the impetus for state legislation across the nation.”

=====================

7.20.18 — REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, Austin, Texas

RESOLUTION TO PROTECT STUDENTS FROM EXPOSURE TO POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE CONTENT BY SUPPORTING A PARENT’S RIGHT TO GRANT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT FOR SEX EDUCATION

WHEREAS, parents are a child’s first and foremost educators, and have primary responsibility for the education of their children. Parents have a right to direct their children’s education, care, and upbringing; (1)

WHEREAS, education is much more than schooling. Education is the whole range of activities by which families and communities transmit to a younger generation, not just knowledge and skills, but ethical and behavioral norms and traditions. It is the handing over of a cultural identity; (2)

WHEREAS, American education has, for the last several decades, been the focus of constant controversy, as centralizing forces from outside the family and community have sought to remake education in order to remake America. This has done immense damage; (3)

WHEREAS, school administrators routinely ask parents for their prior written permission for students to participate in various school-related instruction and activities, including, but not limited to: field trips, sports, and distribution of medicine;

WHEREAS, parents and their students should be afforded the same respect with regard to the increasingly sensitive and controversial nature of human sexuality instruction;

WHEREAS, much of the content in human sexuality instruction centers on contentious and sensitive issues, including but not limited to: abortion, birth control, sexual activity, sexual orientation, transgenderism, and/or gender identity;

WHEREAS, the content often includes a personal analysis or survey that reflects or influences the student’s opinions on sensitive topics such as religious beliefs and practices, sexual orientation, and/or sexual activity;

WHEREAS, most states grant an obscenity exemption that allows content that would otherwise be deemed harmful to minors to be disseminated for educational purposes, creating the potential for inappropriate content to be included within human sexuality instruction;

WHEREAS, such information, content, or ideology is most appropriately placed within the discretion of the parents or guardians;

WHEREAS, the current opt-out paradigm assumes parental consent to student participation, allowing schools to automatically enroll students in potentially explicit, sensitive, and/or controversial human sexuality instruction without prior written permission;

WHEREAS, human sexuality instruction frequently places the wishes and concerns of the parents and/or guardians at odds with those of the school district; and

WHEREAS, the wishes and concerns of the parents and/or guardians are preeminent to those of the School District and should be acknowledged by simply affording parents and/or guardians the right to grant permission for such instruction; therefore

RESOLVED, that public schools must disclose the content contained within human sexuality instruction to the parents and/or guardians of all unemancipated students and shall only enroll those students whose parents and/or guardians provide prior written permission to opt their student into human sexuality instruction;

RESOLVED, that the default shall be that no human sexuality instruction shall be provided to any student not yet emancipated without prior written consent from their parent and/or guardian, making an opt-out default an insufficient protection for either the safety of the student or the rights of the parent;

RESOLVED, that all state legislatures are encouraged to enact legislation that implements these notices and safeguards to protect students from exposure to potentially inappropriate and salacious content and to acknowledge the right of the parents and/or guardians to direct their children’s education, care, and upbringing, including their right to protect them from exposure to content they find unsuitable.

_____________________________________

1 Platform of the Republican Party, Issued by the Republican National Committee, page 33 (2016, Cleveland, Ohio).

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

Adopted by the Republican National Committee, July 20, 2018

Family Man, Foe of Judicial Activism: SCOTUS nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh stands with wife Ashley and their two daughters, Margaret (left) and Elizabeth (Liza) (right), before being introduced to the nation by President Trump Monday night at the White House. In a 2017 speech Kavanaugh praised the restrained judicial approach of former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist and called him his “first judicial hero.” Photo taken from White House video.

Folks, here is Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver’s take on Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump’s nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The monumental question before us is this: how would a future “Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh” decide on past cases like Roe v. Wade (coupled with Doe v. Bolton: Court-imposed nationalization of abortion-on-demand) and Obergefell v. Hodges (Court-imposed nationalization of homosexuality-based “marriage”), both of which relied heavily on an activist-minded judicial approach that displaced the legislative process?

Also, please note in the media discussions about Kavanaugh that commentary on the potential repeal of Obergefell is muted, despite it being only three years (as opposed to 45 for Roe) since the Court invented a new “constitutional right” by radically redefining marriage–effectively blocking the American people’s voice and votes in dozens of states from preserving real and natural marriage. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

Press release by Liberty Counsel, July 10, 2018:

Kavanaugh’s Judicial Philosophy

WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Trump nominated D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy’s vacancy on the Supreme Court.

Judge Kavanaugh, who has written over 300 judicial opinions, said in his nomination speech last night that his judicial philosophy has been “straightforward. A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make it.” Kavanaugh also stressed he believes in interpreting statutes and the Constitution as they are written, “informed by history and tradition and precedent.”

In his speech, “From the Bench: The Constitutional Statesmanship of Chief Justice William Rehnquist“ that Kavanaugh presented for the 2017 Walter Berns Constitution Day Lecture at the American Enterprise Institute about Chief Justice Rehnquist, he said Rehnquist was “his first judicial hero.” Kavanaugh’s lecture focused on the impact that Rehnquist had on the Supreme Court, noting that the “Court unquestionably changed and became more an institution of law, where its power is to interpret and to apply the law as writing, informed by historical practice, not be its own person and policy predilections.”

Regarding the Supreme Court’s abortion decisions, he pointed out that Rehnquist dissented from the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision. In Casey, Rehnquist was originally writing the majority opinion to overrule Roe, but 30 days into the writing phase, Justice Kennedy changed his vote from striking down Roe to upholding Roe. The opinion was now removed from Rehnquist who then found himself in the dissent.

Rehnquist believed a judge must apply the law, not create it. He believed that fundamental rights must either be enumerated in the Constitution (like free speech) or deeply rooted in history and tradition. Abortion was neither an enumerated right nor deeply rooted in history and tradition. While Rehnquist’s views on abortion never became the majority opinion, he did write the majority opinion in the 1997 so-called “right to die” case known as Washington v. Glucksberg. Writing for the 5-4 majority, Rehnquist said that the “right to die” was neither an enumerated right nor deeply rooted in history and tradition. Here, Rehnquist’s originalist views did prevail.