Even since the recent recording of this video interview by Monte Larrick of the Illinois Family Institute (published June 21, 2014 and recorded the week before), yet another Republican governor has capitulated to judicial activism on same-sex “marriage.” Go HERE for a local CBS-Pittsburgh TV news report on Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett deciding not to appeal U.S. District Court Judge John Jones III’s ruling imposing homosexual “marriages” on Pennsylvania. Note that Corbett–like Illinois GOP gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner, as well as Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder–does not want to discuss “gay marriage” publicly. Since when did defending marriage as between a man and a woman become the third rail in Republican politics?–Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera being hand-cuffed and arrested April 14 after standing up against abortion and homosexual “marriage” at the University of Regina. LaBarbera and Canadian pro-family activist Bill Whatcott have pleaded not guilty to the charge of “mischief” following their peaceful protest at the university.

Folks, my friend Bill Whatcott and I have entered a Not Guilty plea to the charge of “mischief” leveled against us at the instigation of left-leaning University of Regina officials who didn’t like our pro-life and anti-homosexual-agenda viewpoint being aired at their campus. Bill and I were arrested and jailed April 14, 2014 after merely standing up for life and traditional marriage at the university in a peaceful and civil protest. The arrest came just days after this writer was first denied entry into Canada–and then allowed in after appeal–to give a presentation as an invited speaker at a Saskatchewan pro-life event. Here is a report on our not guilty plea in the Regina Leader-Post. There are additional links to other aspects of the Canada story at the Leader-Post website. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

________________

REGINA — Two anti-gay advocates entered not guilty pleas on Monday regarding an incident on the University of Regina campus in April.

The not guilty pleas for mischief for Bill Whatcott and Peter LaBarbera were entered by Weyburn lawyer Michael Weger. The matter is scheduled to be back in Regina Provincial Court on June 23 to set a trial date.

Whatcott and LaBarbera were arrested on April 14 after refusing to leave the U of R campus when ordered to do so by security and the Regina Police Service.

Whatcott and LaBarbera set up an anti-abortion display on campus and handed out anti-LGBT literature, deemed by university officials as potentially harmful to members of the university community.

The incident came days after LaBarbera, head of the organization Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, spoke in Weyburn at the Saskatchewan Pro-Life convention.

LaBarbera was initially denied access to Canada over concerns of spreading hate speech, but won an appeal and agreed to leave Saskatchewan by April 17.

Whatcott has been in trouble before for distributing anti-homosexual literature. In 2005, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled he was guilty of inciting hatred against homosexuals in pamphlets he distributed to homes in Regina and Saskatoon in 2001 and 2002.

On Feb. 27, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the SHRC’s decision.

tmceachern@leaderpost.com

Folks, each day, it seems, brings another outrage by the Obama administration, to the point where it is difficult to keep track of them all. Amidst the swirl of mendacious spin, crass political lies, imperious law-breaking and general incompetence, Attorney General Eric Holder found time to promote allowing homosexual men as Boy Scout leaders. [See the full Holder speech HERE.] Perhaps putting adult men who are sexually attracted to other men (and/or adolescent boys) in tents out in the woods with 12-year-old boys is a priority for LGBT-enthralled liberals, but we doubt it sits high on the list for the rest of America. (Last year, the BSA caved on allowing homosexual youth members.)

Perhaps Mr. Holder is so busy promoting a leftist social agenda that he is unaware that the BSA has already been forced—under a victims’ lawsuit–to release a portion of its “perversion files” documenting boy-molesting Scoutmasters; AFTAH has called on the Scouts’ leadership to release ALL the sordid files. So the current policy banning homosexual men is hardly about “perpetuating stereotypes” but actually about protecting boys. Moreover, there is now a group, B4UAct.org, that is working to help and humanize pedophiles as “minor-attracted people” (MAPs), which will invariably contribute to the “mainstreaming” of pedophilia in society. Penn State research mathematician and pro-family writer Gary Morella responds to Holder on the potential of the Boy Scouts acquiescing to a full “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy on homosexuality, i.e., including adults. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

________________________________

“And in far too many organizations, policies and practices that discriminate against LGBT individuals remain persistent concerns. Lambda Legal is among the groups that have led efforts to address these conditions – for instance, through your work in 1992, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, to challenge the termination of an Assistant Scoutmaster when the organization found out he was gay.  Unfortunately, the continuation of a policy that discriminates against gay adult leaders–by an iconic American institution–only preserves and perpetuates the worst kind of stereotypes.  Like ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ it’s a relic of an age of prejudice and insufficient understanding.  Today, courageous lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals routinely put their lives on the line as members of America’s armed services.  They inspire us, they protect us, and they defend us.  And if these men and women are fit for military service, then surely they are fit to mentor, to teach, and to serve as role models for the leaders of future generations.”–U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder

*           *           *

Ousted Scoutmaster and homosexual predator William Lazzareschi is among those listed in the Boy Scouts’ “perversion files” released under court order through a victims’ lawsuit. AFTAH has called on the BSA to release ALL its homosexual molestation files.

___________________________

By Gary Morella

The morally bankrupt elitists that make up the totality of the Obama Administration are owed nothing but the contempt of Americans in more than name only opposing their diabolic agenda via their constitutional freedom of religion rights to oppose that which the invariant moral teaching of their faith summarily condemns for the sake of the common good rooted in the “laws of nature, and of nature’s God.” Theirs is a morally bankrupt social engineering agenda which has two main priorities–the mandated promotion of baby killing via abortion and sexual perversion under force of unjust law which is owed no obedience whatsoever.

How can a Boy Scout be inclined to homosexuality? A Scout takes an oath to be “morally straight,” which makes the concept of “homosexual Scouts” oxymoronic.

And what about the well-documented correlation between pedophilia and homosexuality? Are we obliged to put our Scouts at risk because a radical minority hell-bent on living self-destructive lifestyles won’t be satisfied until they are confirmed in their vice, demanding acceptance of their perverted lifestyles by all aspects of society including the religious community?

I have a simple question. If there is no connection between pedophilia and homosexuality, why are articles promoting the former showing up repeatedly in homosexual journals?

A new relativism?

Those who are interested in legalizing sexual relations between adults and children want to change the parameters of the discussion from the “absolutist” moral position, to the “relative” position that it can sometimes be beneficial. A controversial 1998 article in an American Psychological Association Bulletin, an article that was subsequently refuted by the head of the APA after the pressure of near-unanimous congressional condemnation with the notable exception of a handful of representatives to include a prominent homosexual, furthered exactly this position.

In a lead article of the Journal of Homosexuality [published in 1999], Harris Mirkin argues that the “sexually privileged” have disadvantaged the pedophile through sheer political force in the same way that blacks were disadvantaged by whites before the civil-rights movement. One would hope that supporters of the late Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., could see that, if Christianity meant anything to Dr. King, he would roll over in his grave to see such a perverted analogy with a civil rights movement that had nothing to do with promoting aberrant self-destructive behavior. His niece, Alveda Celeste King, has been outspoken to that effect, saying in a CNN report “that to equate homosexuality with race is to give a death sentence to civil rights.”

In 1991, the campaign to legalize man-boy sex was furthered by the publication of a two-issue special of the Journal of Homosexuality, reissued as Male Intergenerational Intimacy: Historical, Socio-Psychological, and Legal Perspectives. [Editor’s note: the book was published by Harrington Park Press, an imprint of Haworth Press, publisher of the Journal of Homosexuality.]

This volume provided devastating information on the way psychologically immature pedophile men use vulnerable boys who are starved for adult nurturance and protection.

In the foreword, Gunter Schmidt decries discrimination against and persecution of pedophiles, and describes “successful pedophile relationships which help and encourage the child, even though the child often agrees to sex while really seeking comfort and affection. These are often emotionally deprived, deeply lonely, socially isolated children who seek, as it were, a refuge in an adult’s love and for whom, because of their misery, see it as a stroke of luck to have found such an ‘enormously nurturant relationship’.”

Another writer [the late Edward Brongersma] said a man who counseled troubled teenage boys could achieve “miracles not by preaching to them, but by sleeping with them.” The loving pedophile can offer a “companionship, security and protection” which neither peers nor parents can provide (p. 162). Parents should look upon the pedophile who loves their son “not as a rival or competitor, not as a thief of their property, but as a partner in the boy’s upbringing, someone to be welcomed into their home…” (p. 164).

In yet another deeply disturbing article in Male Intergenerational Intimacy, revealingly titled, “The Main Thing is Being Wanted: Some Case Studies on Adult Sexual Experiences with Children.” pedophiles reveal their need to find a child who will satisfy their desire for uncritical affirmation and a lost youth. One of the men justifies his activity as a search for love, and complains that: “Although I’ve had physical relationships with probably, I don’t know, maybe a hundred or more boys over the years, I can only point to four or five true relationships over that time.”

The volume also contains an introductory article that decries society’s anti-pedophile sentiment. The authors complain about the difficulty studying man-boy relationships in “an objective way,” and they hope that the social sciences will adopt a broader approach that could lead to understanding of the “diversity and possible benefits of intergenerational intimacy.”

“Right” of children to enjoy sex?

Mirkin says the discussion must move on to such issues as the “right” of children to have and enjoy sex.

To pedophile advocates, any discussion of the benefits of child-adult sex is a victory. The APA should have understood this, and should have been well aware of, and vocally resistant to, the growing movement to legalize pedophilia as promoted in homosexual journals.

Have we devolved as a society to such an extent that the “right of children to have and enjoy sex” carries more weight than the rights of their parents, charged with their physical and spiritual welfare, to bring them up according to the law of God, in particular, His natural law written on the hearts of men? We will have if we acquiesce to the demands of radical homosexuality as evidenced by the aforementioned articles in the Journal of Homosexuality.

The good news is that the Journal of Homosexuality has performed a service by letting us know just who the real extremists are. Remember that the next time the word “homophobe” rears its ugly head in conversation or policy.

Lest we forget, what we’re witnessing is a backdoor attempt to subvert the very moral foundation of the Boy Scouts of America through homosexual agitprop. How can parents, who out of course of fulfilling their responsibilities to their children by justly discriminating between right and wrong behavior, feel comfortable with a policy that would allow publicly avowed homosexual advocates and/or homosexuals into scouting on the premise that they would not condone and/or perform homosexual acts?

The very real agenda of such advocates was shown on Fox’s O’Reilly news show of 8/1/01, when a representative from the Massachusetts gay and lesbian caucus argued that “Don’t ask, don’t tell” also meant that the Scouts can’t talk about heterosexual relationships leading to marriage, and their leaders couldn’t wear wedding rings, implying that somehow, such talk would offend the homosexual membership. In short, what he was advocating was that “Don’t ask, don’t tell” not only applied to the unnatural acts of homosexuals that have been historically condemned by the vast majority of faith traditions, but also to natural marriage acts that aren’t “equally” condemned.

Scout Handbook re-write coming?

Real marriage offends homosexuals because “marriage” is not reserved for them, no matter that the concept of “homosexual marriage” is oxymoronic since there is this slight problem with propagation of the species. This kind of an attitude means that the portion of the Scout Handbook on Sexual Responsibility (Chapter 14, pp. 376-378) with the accent on “responsibility” will have to be rewritten.

The aforementioned homosexual advocate had no problems referring to homosexuals as parents when asked by O’Reilly why he couldn’t understand the concerns of parents in regard to the safety of their children. This is completely counter to what is in the Scout Handbook, which rightfully recognizes the natural context, the ONLY context of marriage, between a man and a woman.

What about the Handbook section that deals with responsibility to your beliefs where the Scouts are told that “sex should take place only between people who are married to each other” with abstinence until marriage being the priority concern in order to “give a child a close, loving family in which to grow”–with the clear inference that procreation is a function of “natural” monogamous marriage with a person of the opposite sex?

What about the section that deals with a Scout’s responsibility to himself where he’s told that “An understanding of ‘wholesome’ sexual behavior can bring lifelong happiness with irresponsibility or ignorance causing a lifetime of regret?” What could be more irresponsible than the de facto promotion of homosexuality by such misguided policies such as “Don’t ask, don’t tell” given the evidence coming from many professional sources to include the Center for Disease Control that homosexual behavior is the most risky because of the unnatural acts involved and its widely documented aspect of promiscuity where monogamous relationships are not the norm?

These are questions from responsible parents, recognizing that Scouts put a premium on telling the truth, that Boy Scout councils contemplating only “technical” adherence to their rules are required to answer. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” travels only one road, that of de facto homosexual advocacy.

What is required for the welfare of all concerned, not the least of which is a group of people being told the heinous lie that their aberrant unnatural behavior is physically and psychologically OK in total ignorance of the mountain of evidence to the contrary, is a “Please ask, please tell” policy with regard to homosexuality. The most serious spiritual consequences will result if the BSA continues to undermine its own Scout Oath emphasizing “doing my best to do my duty to God,” first and foremost. You don’t “help other people” by lying to them, another part of the Scout Oath.

_______________________

Related items:

AFTAH Calls on the Boy Scouts of America to Release ALL its Homosexual Molestation Files: [click HERE]

Sexual Assault Case Again Proves FORMER Boy Scout Policy was Right (2009):
http://www.personal.psu.edu/glm7/m379.htm

Holder: If Gay Adults Are Fit for Military Service, They Are Fit to Lead Boy Scouts (CNS News): [Click HERE]

Holder implies that homosexuality is “equal” in all respects to heterosexuality

President Barack Obama and his Attorney General, Eric Holder.

The following is the full text of Attorney General Eric Holder’s speech at a June 10 reception for the homosexual activist organization Lambda Legal. Excerpted at the top are Holder’s remarks advocating that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) allow homosexual adult Scoutmasters. Last year, the BSA capitulated to a longtime LGBT demand by admitting openly homosexual boys as members–only to find itself under continued pressure from pro-homosexual groups to allow openly “gay” adults.

As an artifact of American political, cultural and legal history, this speech is quite stunning in its claims and underlying presumptions. It deserves a thorough dissection by reasoned defenders of historic, Judeo-Christian truth. Holder, a mere man of the Left, presumes divine-like moral authority as he stipulates that homosexual relationships are completely equal in all respects to normal, heterosexual relationships:

“And although millions of Americans have stood together to remind these young [homosexual] men and women that “it gets better,” too many others continue to hold beliefs and perpetuate stereotypes that LGBT citizens are somehow inferior.  That their love is somehow less worthy.  And that who they are – at their very core – is somehow less legitimate than their peers.”

May I introduce Exhibit A in defense of the presumption of heterosexual superiority, Mr. Attorney General? Homosexual relationships (two men, or two women) simply are incapable of producing children. Contrast this with heterosexual relationships, which, of course, as a general rule produce kids.

Even random, reckless heterosexual sexual encounters can produce a child, while homosexuals generally must go through various methods, usually complex and expensive, to acquire a baby. Sterile heterosexual couples that are forced to do the same are the exception, not the rule, and they merely seek to recreate the natural family–not create fatherless or motherless households by design. Thus, Holder’s “equality” appeal is not grounded in fact.

We also note that Holder cites the CDC with respect to higher “gay youth” suicide rates, but neglects any mention of the CDC data showing an alarming linkage between male homosexual sex and sexually-transmitted diseases like HIV and syphilis. Nature itself “discriminates” against homosexuality–or, as my friend John Biver says, it looks like “Mother Nature is a bigot” on the issue of homosexuality, if one believes the Left.

Given all this and much more, the burden should be on Attorney General Holder to prove that homosexual “love” is equally worthy, equally legitimate, equally safe, equally productive and valuable to society, etc., as heterosexual marital love.

Then again, to quote Mr. Holder, perhaps making observations like these is considered “animus,” of the sort that ultimately must be stamped out by America’s emerging Pro-“Gay” State. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

___________________________________

Attorney General Eric Holder Delivers Remarks at the 14th Annual Lambda Legal Reception

~ Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Boy Scout excerpt:

And in far too many organizations, policies and practices that discriminate against LGBT individuals remain persistent concerns. Lambda Legal is among the groups that have led efforts to address these conditions – for instance, through your work in 1992, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, to challenge the termination of an Assistant Scoutmaster when the organization found out he was gay.  Unfortunately, the continuation of a policy that discriminates against gay adult leaders – by an iconic American institution – only preserves and perpetuates the worst kind of stereotypes.  Like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” it’s a relic of an age of prejudice and insufficient understanding.  Today, courageous lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals routinely put their lives on the line as members of America’s armed services.  They inspire us, they protect us, and they defend us.  And if these men and women are fit for military service, then surely they are fit to mentor, to teach, and to serve as role models for the leaders of future generations.

______________________________________

Entire speech:

Thank you, Patrick [Menasco] and Sandy [Chamblee], for those kind words; for your friendship over the years; and for your tireless work in leading the legal profession towards greater diversity and inclusion.  It’s a pleasure to share the stage with you this evening. And it’s a great privilege to join dedicated leaders like Executive Director Kevin Cathcart – and trailblazers like my friend Paul Smith – in celebrating Lambda Legal’s remarkable record of achievement; in reflecting on the work that remains before us; and in reaffirming our commitment to build the more just and more equal society that everyone in this country deserves.

Warning: Vulgar Sexual References and one instance of Rear Nudity

For the record, below is the longest YouTube video we could find of the annual uber-blasphemous “Hunky Jesus” contest, held on Easter Sunday (April 20, 2014)–which coincidentally fell this year on the annual day (“4-20”) celebrating pot use. Hunky Jesus is sponsored by the mock, drag-queen “nuns” groups, Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, which is a perverse “charity” funding homosexual causes in San Francisco, with chapters across the world. This video was created by UndertheGoldenGate.com.

As you can see, to many on the pro-LGBT Left, the most extreme anti-Christian bigotry is hip and cool, even as they scold the Right about alleged “hate.” Now that takes chutzpah. What’s also interesting is the degree to which the homosexualist (“gay”) movement in the United States has been joined to that of the gender-confused–“transgenders,” transvestites and transsexuals–which makes sense if male homosexualism is rooted in a masculinity crisis. Behold the God-haters of the urban Secular Left. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

P.S. Please be warned that this is a highly offensive video (frontal nudity is fuzzed out), but one that conveys San Francisco’s twisted values better than most:

Families should stay away from Disney World June 3 – 9. A “gay” man explains why:

“Over the years I have heard about, and have witnessed, what is commonly referred to as PDA (public displays of affection) during Gay Days, and almost always it’s done in full view of a family, or at least children. I don’t care if you’re straight or gay, there are some things kids don’t need to see – and trust me, two queens [flamboyant homosexual men] frenching outside Cinderella castle is really high on that list.” – Homosexual advocate and Disney expert Peter Werner, “Why I’m Not Going to Gay Days This Year”

“Gay Days” Disneyworld Schedule for 2014:
Thurs., June 5 – Animal Kingdom
Fri., June 6 – Disney’s Hollywood Studios
Sat., June 7 – Magic Kingdom, [by far the largest “Gay Days” event]
Sun, June 8 – Epcot

INDECENCY AT DISNEY PARKS: Banners like this one have been flown over Disney World by the Florida Family Association and other groups in recent years–leading to a reduction of normal families visiting the Magic Kingdom theme park that day. We altered the date for this year (2014) to Saturday, June 7–which is when the massive “Gay Days” celebration is scheduled for Magic Kingdom (See entire “Gay Days 2014” schedule for June 3-9 above or for a complete schedule go HERE.) For years, Pete Werner, an openly homosexual Disney travel expert (and “gay rights” advocate), has been warning parents not to bring their children to Disney World’s various theme parks on the respective days targeted for “Gay Days”–due to the excessive homosexual PDAs (public displays of affection) and homo-erotic flaunting that goes on there, much of it aimed at scandalizing families and kids. Disney officials do not warn families in advance that their parks will be inundated by “Gay Days” celebrants–so every year outraged parents who arriving unknowingly on that date demand their money back.

_________________________________________

Folks, it’s that time of the year for “Gay Days at Disney World”–when unsuspecting families who have already shelled out a ton of cash for a Disney trip are shocked to discover that their much-anticipated visit coincides with one of the biggest celebrations of out-and-proud homosexuality on the planet. I just called Disneyworld’s ticket agency (407-939-5277) and they do NOT warn families about “Gay Days” at Magic Kingdom Sat., June 7 (see above for the full schedule for the various theme park “Gay Days” June 3-9.)

DISNEY GAY DAYS'”PORN STAR” DEVIANCE: “Gay Days” at Disney is a full week of parties and homosexuality-celebrating events. Here is an especially twisted item on the 2014 Gay Days site advertising a pornographic “ball” Friday, June 6–the night before the Magic Kingdom “Gay Days” event. The “Unzipped Black and Blue Ball” features “Meet & Greet locations to meet the porn stars and take photos.” Click on graphic to enlarge.

When I asked about the upcoming Gay Days on June 7, the person on the phone had no specific, ready knowledge to impart about the event, and told me (accurately) that the homosexual celebration is a private affair and “We’re not associated with that.” She had to look up the date on the web to confirm to me that June 7 is “Gay Day” for Magic Kingdom–indicating that Disney (probably fearing a “discrimination” charge or lawsuit) has not provided its phone ticketing agents with a pre-written script about the controversial “Days.” This policy of not alerting people to “Gay Days” explains why some unfortunate families get surprised the first weekend of June every year at Disney World.

When I asked whether some families had complained after arriving at Magic Kingdom only to learn that thousands upon thousands of homosexuals engaging in same-sex kisses, etc., will be at the park that day, she acknowledged that this has happened but downplayed its seriousness. Perhaps this happened to “one family” last year, she said–which sounds to me like quite an understatement.

The following is excerpted from Disney travel expert Pete Werner’s online article, “Why I’m Not Going to Gay Days this Year”; there is a podcast accompanying the article–which appears to have been recorded a few years ago. I differ greatly with Werner on the morality of homosexuality and “gay rights,” but he’s doing a decent thing here–and I’m sure he’s taken a lot of flak for it. Please alert your vacationing friends about June 7. You can listen to online to Werner’s podcast on Gay Days HERE. God bless. –Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

____________________________________

Why I’m Not Going to Gay Days This Year

By Pete Werner [complete article and podcast HERE]

Authors Note: This article pertains mainly to the Saturday event during Gay Days. The rest of the week is fairly benign. My suggestion to those who wish to avoid the event is to avoid the Magic Kingdom on the first Saturday of June. During the week, a different theme park is featured for the “Gay Days” event. If you wish to avoid the crowds, I suggest that you avoid the scheduled park for that day.

The Gay Days schedule for 2014:

Thu, June 5 – Animal Kingdom
Fri, June 6 – Disney’s Hollywood Studios
Sat, June 7 – Magic Kingdom
Sun, June 8 – Epcot

“Go get a room.”

That’s exactly what I feel like yelling this time every year as Gay Days descend upon Orlando. I know that during the first week in June, unsuspecting families and otherwise good and reasonable people will, at times, be confronted with images and events they would probably rather not see or experience on their family vacation. These people paid to visit Disney World, but during the first week in June, it looks a lot more like South Beach.

For the record, I’m a 42-year old gay man living in Orlando. I’ve been to Gay Days before, and thought it was a little bit over the top, but always bit my lip – especially here on the site. This year though, it just seems completely out of control, and I wanted to get this off my chest.

I’ve watched over the years as Gay Days has grown in scope and size. What once was a small group of well-meaning gay men and lesbians has grown – and in my opinion, deformed – into what is now nothing more than a vile spectacle of self indulgence and indecency.

No matter how prudish that last sentence may sound, trust me – I’m no prude. I have a liberal streak that cuts through me like a hot knife through butter, but I like to think that I was raised with a certain sense of decency and a pretty good sense of right and wrong. There is a time and a place for everything, and Disney World is neither in this instance.

Brendan Eich

Thank you to AFTAH Board Member John McCartney for concisely injecting some clarity into the recent tragic resignation of Brendan Eich as Mozilla CEO in the face of a pro-homosexual pressure campaign. The following open letter was sent to Mozilla employees in the last couple of weeks:

An Open Letter to Mozilla Employees

This letter is addressed to those who agitated against Brendan Eich’s promotion to Mozilla Firefox’s CEO. Considering that he was the business’s co-founder and the provider of your livelihood, right order would have required you to resign in protest, but that would have taken courage of your convictions, which was apparently in short supply at the time.

The issue: Eich’s donating $1,000 to [California’s 2008] Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman, which is what marriage has generally been throughout the ages and ever should be. Same-sex “marriage” is an absurdity (Pope Francis calls it anthropological regression), which even “gays” joked about in the ’70’s. Proposition 8 was the people’s initiative opposing institutionalizing a man’s using another man as a woman, and a woman’s using another woman as a man. This has neither the support of nature, morality, normality, even health. Three hundred twenty-five thousand (325,000) men having sex with men (MSM) have died of HIV/AIDS since 1980. Of the 1.2 million HIV/AIDS victims in the United States, 532,000 are MSM–who comprise a mere 2 percent of the population. The malady is now spreading fastest among MSM 13-29 years old. What’s homosexual “marriage” going to do for this?

What the media don’t know and the “gay” community won’t admit (the American Psychiatric Association’s non-scientific pronouncement notwithstanding), is that “gay” activists are forcing on this country an adaptation to earlier trauma and/or emotional deprivation. Instead of focusing on the source of such, thereby gaining understanding leading to freedom, they are using politics and media to make it the norm. From this: Spare us, O, Lord.

Peter LaBarbera,

President, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH)

John J. McCartney, Jr.,

Board Member, AFTAH

SALON SPREADS A LIE: the liberal online magazine Salon became the conduit for Kate Geiselman’s absurd “effing” lie. See AFTAH attorney Charles LiMandri’s letter demanding a retraction and apology from Geiselman HERE.

Thank you to my friend and conservative columnist Gina Miller for deconstructing this libelous Salon piece based on an absurd lie concocted by Sinclair Community College professor Kate Geiselman. We hope that she and Salon do the right thing and retract this story.–Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

See pro-family attorney Charles LiMandri’s letter demanding a public retraction and apology HERE:

Watch the videos of the walkout and LaBarbera’s SCC speech HERE

Gina Miller writes:

____________________________

Salon Publishes Libelous Hit Piece on Peter LaBarbera

By Gina Miller

Spring has sprung with a vengeance on Americans for Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera, although it’s not Spring’s fault, nor is it Mr. LaBarbera’s.  The vengeance comes from anti-Christian activists and purveyors of “tolerance” and lies who have caused Mr. LaBarbera quite a bit of trouble since April.  After being invited to Canada to speak to a pro-life group, and overcoming efforts to block his entry into the country, he was then arrested there for “trespassing” while he was standing for free speech on a public college campus, a charge which was later changed to “mischief” and is still pending.  You see, our neighbor Canada has laws against “hate speech,” and they consider telling the truth about homosexual behavior to be “hate speech,” and that’s why they targeted Mr. LaBarbera.

On April 9^th, just before he left for Canada, he was invited by the Traditional Values Club to give a speech at Sinclair Community College (SCC) in Dayton, Ohio on the topic of the radical homosexual movement.  A couple of intolerant, pro-homosexual teachers, who are apparently obsessed with hatred for the Traditional Values Club, organized a large walk-out of his speech, which he handled with an abundance of grace.  One of the teachers, Kate Geiselman, subsequently decided to write a column, published on April 16^th by Salon.com, which calls him an “anti-gay bigot” in the headline.  In it, she claims he was “angry” at the walk-out, and as the teachers and students filed out of the room, she declares that he said, “You’re leaving?  Are you effing kidding?”

One small, but important detail, however:  Peter LaBarbera never said that, which makes her column pure, actionable libel.  He did say “effing,” but it was in response to a heckler who flung the actual F-word at him during the walk-out, and Mr. LaBarbera was repeating to the audience what he heard the guy say (replacing the guy’s F-word with the euphemistic “effing”) in illustration of the “tolerance” of those walking out.

Another of the teacher collaborators, Rebecca Morean, posted a comment at the Salon column, stating in part:

LaBarbera certainly said “Effing.” I, and many others heard it, as we were the first to eject ourselves. I’d rather be accused of saying that btw than being a bigot.  Odd sense of outrage.  There are other tapes, and the fact that the one posted means he didn’t say it is silly.  The mic wasn’t by his face.

Another small, but large, detail:  a two-minute clip of the walk-out reveals that Mr. LaBarbera was holding the mic and speaking into it the entire time, so the mic was indeed “by his face.”  It would appear that Ms. Morean is not concerned with telling the truth, because videos of it also reveal what Mr. LaBarbera said, which does not include, “You’re leaving?  Are you effing kidding?”

Here is what he said, as transcribed from video recordings:

“I suppose this is a walk-out.  Well, this is, this is what I say, not, not even people willing to hear from the other side.  I think this is, this is regretful. [heckler interjects F-word]  ‘Your message is ‘effing’ garbage,’ that guy just said.  Yeah, yeah this is a shame, but, well, those of you who remained are exhibiting true tolerance…  I mean this is—this is the Left in action; I’m sorry.  You know, tolerance for me but not for you.  Don’t even want to hear a viewpoint.  That’s their right, and I just think it’s immature…”

So, a heckler flings the real “F-word” at Mr. LaBarbera, and he responds to the heckler by saying, “‘Your message is ‘effing’ garbage,’ that guy just said.”  This is quite a different story than what Ms. Geiselman claims, as does Salon in publishing her column.

I also obtained statements from witnesses who were in the audience and testified that Mr. LaBarbera did not say what the two teachers claim.

Al Giambrone, a co-founder of the Traditional Values Club, wrote:

I was present for the entire event…  I was sitting in the third or fourth row on the end seat next to the center aisle directly behind one of the instructors who lead the walkout.  I had a perfect view and was well within earshot of Mr. LaBarbera (even if he hadn’t had a mike) when the walkout occurred.  I paid careful attention to his reaction and what he said when they walked out because I was curious to see how he would handle it. I knew it was coming.  I was quite impressed by the way in which he responded, by his presence of mind and by his effective but respectful demeanor, not only during the walkout but through the entire event.  At no time did I hear him use any inappropriate language nor did I see him display any contentious reaction even when hostile members in the audience gave him what many would consider good reason to do so.