“Sex educator” offers naive description of sadomasochism at odds with BDSM cruelties and extremes

BDSM: CELEBRATING HUMAN DEGRADATION: A younger male “slave” poses for a photo with his  older “master(s)” at the “Up Your Alley” BDSM-celebrating street fair in San Francisco last Sunday. Tragically, Planned Parenthood is celebrating extreme behaviors that glory in human degradation. Photo: Peter LaBarbera/AFTAH. Click to enlarge.

WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTO

As you can see from this video produced by Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, the abortion industry giant has moved seriously into the business of promoting extreme sexual deviance to teenagers. Notably, Planned Parenthood has long been an avid promoter of homosexuality and gender confusion through its sex-ed programs and advocacy. This “BDSM 101” video by 20-something San Francisco “sex educator” Laci Green was originally published November 14, 2012, and was re-posted February 26, 2014 by the conservative news site CNSNews.com. Here is the CNS synopsis offered by the YouTube video that we are re-posting:

(CNSNews.com) — Planned Parenthood of Northern New England (PPNNE)–which received more than $2.75 million in government funding in 2012–has produced and posted online a video specifically aimed at teenagers that promotes bondage and sadomasochism (BDSM) and proposes “rules” to follow when engaging in these activities.

Naturally, sex radicals offer the “softest” rhetoric they can as they introduce dangerous and extreme behaviors to young people and the larger public. (Green’s PP-backed video is purportedly directed at those 18 years and older–but any kid could watch it on her YouTube channel.) Ms. Green is obviously unfamiliar with the grotesque and degrading behaviors associated with homosexual BDSM (Bondage & Discipline, Sadism & Masochism, Dominance & Submission), which I just witnessed firsthand at a San Francisco street fair [AFTAH photo-stories upcoming]. Or perhaps she is merely lying. It is hard to imagine that Green has never ventured out to the notorious annual BDSM street fairs in her own home city, where men are whipped and beaten to the point of bleeding–and others treated like dogs, complete with a leash, like the poor young fellow on his knees in the photo I took above. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH.org

New government data show homosexuality is far less common than most LGBT activists claimed for decades, and a fraction of what most Americans believe

A Convenient Lie: Homosexual activist Kevin Jennings is just one of many homosexual activists who used the “10 Percent” myth, rooted in Alfred Kinsey’s discredited research, to greatly exaggerate the number of homosexuals in America. Jennings’ book would be far less compelling if it were titled, “One Teacher in 45,” to better represent the actual number of homosexuals and bisexuals in society.

Part One

By Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH Special Report

The first-ever major U.S. Government survey to present “nationally representative data on sexual orientation” finds that only 1.6 percent of Americans identify as “gay” or “lesbian,” while .7 percent identify as “bisexual.” This is about considerably less than the much-ballyhooed, decades-old LGBT claim that 10 percent of society is “gay.”

Almost 98 percent of the 35,557 survey respondents identified themselves as “straight” or “not gay,” according to the survey by the federal National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). It also found significant health and behavior disparities between heterosexuals and self-described gays, lesbians and bisexuals. For example, the latter were much more likely to be heavy drinkers than straights.

So much for ‘10 percent’

The 2.3 percent gay-lesbian-bisexual figure is far below the “10 percent gay” number that has been advanced for decades by homosexual activists and their allies—dating back to the discredited sex research of Alfred Kinsey, who vastly over-sampled sexual adventurers and deviants (including criminals). The “10 Percent” ploy suggested homosexuality was far more common—and hence “normal”–than it actually was. Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, homosexual authors of the influential 1989 book After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in 90s (and relying on Kinsey’s fraudulent estimates), demonstrate how the myth was used for PR purposes:

If we must…pick a specific percentage for propaganda purposes, we may as well stick with the solidly conservative figure suggested by Kinsey decades ago: taking men and women together, at least 10% of the populace has demonstrated its homosexual proclivities so extensively that the proportion may reasonably be called ‘gay.’….

Straights do not appreciate that, with at least one-tenth of the public extensively involved in it, the practice of homosexuality may be a more commonplace activity in America than, say, bowling (6%), jogging (7%), golfing (5%), hunting (6%), reading drugstore romance novels (9%), or ballroom dancing (2%) on a regular basis. (Ballroom dancing—not that’s abnormal.)…

You should grasp clearly why America’s persistent underestimation of the number of homosexuals in its citizenry and core institutions is so dangerous to the cause of civil rights….Literally, the more the better. As Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin explain dryly in their classic study, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male

“To those who believe, as children do, that conformance should be universal, any departure from the rule becomes immorality. The immorality seems particularly gross to an individual who is unaware of the frequency with which exceptions to the supposed rule actually occur.”

Thus, when it comes to fighting the charge that homosexuality is statistically abnormal hence immoral, there is strength in numbers. [pp. 16-17, emphasis theirs]

Here I call it a myth, but the defiance with which homosexual activists like Kirk and Madsen so aggressively promulgated their “10 percent gay” factoid suggests that it could more aptly be called a lie, perhaps a useful political lie—which is to say, propaganda. (Another LGBT activist distortion is the oft-repeated claim that homosexuals, and now transgenders, are “born that way” despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.)

For example, Kevin Jennings, the founder of GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, and a former Obama Department of Education appointee, titled one of his books, “One Teacher in Ten” (see graphic above)—which is far more compelling, from a “gay” activist perspective, than “One Teacher in 45.”

President Obama signing two Executive Orders advancing homosexual and transgender “rights.” One adds “gender identity” to the existing federal nondiscrimination policy (joining “sexual orientation”). The other–addressed by Dr. Michael Brown below–compels federal contractors to abide by federal pro-LGBT nondiscrimination mandates. Obama declined to include a strong religious exemption in the latter Order. Photo: White House; click to enlarge.

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.

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?

Matt Barber

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
CONTACT: FRC Press Office, through Family Research Council

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:

“The world is falling apart, along with the U.S. economy, and yet Senate Democratic leaders think the future of the free world hinges on employers being forced — under the threat of crippling fines — to provide drugs that have the potential to kill an unborn child.

“Rather than address the problems in the Middle East, grow the GDP, or create jobs, Senate liberals are plowing ahead with their ridiculously unfair mandate that puts the jobs, livelihoods and healthcare of millions of Americans in jeopardy.

“Senate Democrats are insisting that family businesses be given two non-choices: either violate your deeply held moral beliefs and comply by paying for drugs and services to which you object, or pay crippling fines of up to $100 per day, per employee, for non-compliance.

“The Supreme Court Court reaffirmed that freedom of conscience is a long-held American tradition, and said that government cannot impose a law on American citizens that forces them to violate their beliefs in order to hold a job, own a business, or purchase health insurance. Apparently, Senate Democrats have forgotten that in America you have a right to exercise your own conscientious beliefs, and the government doesn’t have the right to trample them,” concluded Perkins.

-30-

“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

Judge Garry Nielson in 2003.

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.]

NOT A GOOD ROLE MODEL: AFTAH blocks homosexual kisses because they are indecent. God never intended men to be sexual with other men, nor women with women. This fundamental reality is confirmed by Nature, which clearly discriminates against homosexual conduct (intercourse between two people of the same sex cannot produce life). Michael Sam is doing a great disservice to young people by promoting the idea that immoral and destructive  homosexual behavior is natural and acceptable. Pray for Michael Sam that he will one day join the many men and women who have left homosexuality behind.

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:

• Black youth–your fans among them–ages 13-24 are twice as likely to get HIV/AIDS than those of other ethnic groups.
• 94-95 percent of all HIV cases in 2011 among boys and young men ages 13-24 were linked to homosexual sex, the CDC reports.
• Youth 13-24 incur 26 percent of new HIV/AIDS infections each year.
• An estimated 60 percent of 13-24 year-olds are unaware that they’re infected with HIV; such ignorance can be a death sentence.
• Black men having sex with men (MSM) accounted in 2010 for 39 percent of all HIV/AIDS diagnoses.

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.

Peter LaBarbera

President, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH)

John  J. McCartney, Jr.

AFTAH Board Member

Chicago, Illinois

Court’s defense of religious liberty for profit-making companies could help Christian small businessmen oppressed by “gay rights” laws

Current U.S. Supreme Court: left to right in back: Sotomayor, Breyer, Alito, Kagan. Front, left to right: Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg. Alito wrote the Hobby Lobby decision, and Kennedy is lionized by “gay” activists for writing last year’s decision striking down DOMA. Click to enlarge.

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

Hobby Lobby’s owners, David and Barbara Green, seek to use their business to glorify Jesus Christ. Their 500 stores across the country are closed on Sundays, costing the Greens many millions of dollars in profits.

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:

“In our constitutional tradition, freedom means that all persons have the right to believe or strive to believe in a divine creator and a divine law. For those who choose this course, free exercise is essential in preserving their own dignity and in striving for a self-definition shaped by their religious precepts. Free exercise in this sense implicates more than just freedom of belief….It means, too, the right to express those beliefs and to establish one’s religious (or non-religious) self-definition in the political, civic, and economic life of our larger community.”

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.