One would expect the world’s most famous “gay” Mecca to be perverse, and it surely is. Photos: Americans For Truth About Homosexuality.

Folks, it’s street scenes like this one — in the heart of San Francisco’s “gay” Castro district — that led the city’s suffering citizens to push successfully last year for a qualified ban on public nudity. But as the saying goes, old habits die hard.

I shot these photos on Easter Sunday, March 31, 2013, near the corner of Market and Noe streets. (I ventured to the “gay” Mecca to cover the homosexual drag queen group Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence’s uber-blasphemous “Hunky Jesus” contest, which was cancelled and later rescheduled due to rain.) San Francisco’s prohibition of public nudity — which exempts baudy street festivals like the city’s annual “Folsom Street Fair” — went into effect Feb. 1 and is being challenged in court by nudists.

The ban doesn’t seem to be tightly enforced, as these bare-bottomed man-bunnies were ‘hanging around’ for quite awhile in plain view — on Easter Sunday, no less. They were standing outside a venue hosting a “Zombie Christ” dance party/”haunted house” timed to mock Christ and bash Christianity on the most important Christian holiday of the year. AFTAH will have more on that in another post. (Permission granted to use photos provided credit given to “Americans For Truth.org”) — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

More photos after jump…

“Gay” activists have been promoting the acceptance of homosexual relationships — even to young children — for decades. (This is a page from the 1991 “children’s” book, “Daddy’s Roommate.”) For conservatives to now claim that the debate over “same-sex marriage” is NOT about homosexuality is disingenuous and actually helps normalize the sin of homosexual behavior. Sentence at bottom of page reads, “Being gay is just one more kind of love.” (Click to enlarge.)

“Moral judgment undergirds the entire structure of laws and is necessary for the rational structure of any significant statute. The idea that our laws can stand independent of moral foundation is senseless. We do not think that driving under the influence of alcohol is simply risky, in terms of statistics. We believe that it is wrong, in terms of explicit moral judgment.” –Al Mohler

This is an important piece by Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and we applaud him for writing it. To say that the struggle to preserve marriage from being homosexualized requires “no judgment about the morality of homosexuality” is pure folly and a recipe for defeat. It is a negation of common sense, like telling pro-lifers not to make the case for the humanity of the unborn in arguing against pro-abortion laws.

By pretending that the homosexual “marriage” debate is not really about homosexuality, well-intended people are actually advancing the godless crusade to normalize immoral same-sex behavior and relationships in society. (A neutral response to sin — or a reluctance to confront it — by religious people who know better actually propels sin forward.) We need to rebuild the moral consensus against homosexual behavior, but you cannot do that by running away from the issue.

Substitute another (less politically correct) sexual misbehavior and this formula make no sense: Imagine if conservatives were to carefully avoid discussing, say, the morality of adultery (or worse, talk about respecting the “needs” of adulterous “couples”); would that not be cheered by sexual anarchists and the “open marriage” crowd?

In other words, to fight one evil (homosexual “marriage”), some of our Best and Brightest are effectively lending aid to another, by undermining the moral/spiritual/practical case against homosexuality — a perversion that just a few decades ago was so widely deplored that it was barely mentioned in polite society. We conservatives and people of faith need to talk more about the immorality and tragic realities of homosexuality, not less. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

Reprinted with permission from http://www.albertmohler.com/2013/04/01/bracketing-morality-the-marginalization-of-moral-argument-in-the-same-sex-marriage-debate/:

_____________________________________

Bracketing Morality — The Marginalization of Moral Argument in the Same-Sex Marriage Debate

By Albert Mohler

Monday, April 1, 2013

“Somewhere along the way, standing up for gay marriage went from nervy to trendy.” This was the assessment offered by Frank Bruni, an influential openly-gay columnist for The New York Times. Bruni’s column, published just as the Supreme Court was poised to hear oral arguments in the two same-sex marriage cases now before it, is a celebration of the fact that, as he sees it, same-sex marriage is soon to be the law of the land, whatever the Court may decide. “The trajectory is undeniable. The trend line is clear. And the choice before the justices is whether to be handmaidens of history, or whether to sit it out.”

Bruni may well be right, given the trajectory and the trend-line he has described. Of course, Bruni, along with his fellow columnists, editors, and reporters for The New York Times will, along with their friends in the larger world of elite media, bear much of the responsibility for this. They are certain that their work is the mission of human liberation from irrational prejudice.

In the most important section of Bruni’s column, he writes: “In an astonishingly brief period of time, this country has experienced a seismic shift in opinion — a profound social and political revolution — when it comes to gay and lesbian people.”

That is a powerful summary of what has happened. Bruni is undoubtedly right, and he has helped to make it so. But there is something missing from Bruni’s analysis, and this is something that he has helped to cause as well. The “seismic shift” on the issue of homosexuality is a profound moral revolution as well.

And yet, what makes this moral revolution so vast in consequences and importance is this: the moral dimension has virtually disappeared from the cultural conversation. This is true, we must note, even among the defenders of heterosexual marriage.

AFTAH in the news….

TIME magazine covers, blocked for decency’s sake by AFTAH. TIME managing editor Richard Stengel says the homosexual kisses are “beautiful and symbolized the love that is at the heart of the idea of marriage.” Click on graphic to enlarge.

From OneNewsNow, the online publication of the American Family Assoction [click HERE to view article on their website]:

Media, Republicans Fueling the Left

Posted by Charlie Butts and Chad Groening (American Family News) – April 04, 2013

A pro-family leader asserts that while “nothing’s inevitable,” the media and now members of the Republican Party are helping promote the homosexual agenda.

The April 8 issue of TIME has two different covers with the same theme. One features two women kissing, and the other shows two men doing the same. “Gay Marriage Already Won. The Supreme Court Hasn’t Made Up Its Mind – but America Has” is printed in yellow across the two black and white covers.

But Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) is “upset” by how the magazine is jumping the gun.

“This is shocking that TIME magazine would do this — basically publishing indecent photos, promoting perversion on the cover of their magazine, where on racks across the country children can see this,” he laments. “This is an in-your-face promotion of homosexual immorality, and I’m very upset that they would go to this length.”

And LaBarbera is especially dismayed that the order to print the photos came from the top.

“The managing editor of TIME, Richard Stengel, said the images published by TIME were — quote — ‘beautiful and symbolized the love that is at the heart of the idea of marriage’ — unquote,” the AFTAH president reports. “How can you be more confused? Two people of the same sex kissing symbolizes the love of marriage?”

Marriage has historically been between a man and a woman, and he asserts that media moguls cannot change that.

LaBarbera adds that the media and the far left are confused, and he submits that the article and cover photos are a sellout to the homosexual lobby, as corporate America supports TIME through its advertising dollars.

Sen. Kirk and “gay marriage”

Meanwhile, the pro-family activist who works to expose the truth about homosexuality is not surprised that Illinois Republican Senator Mark Kirk has come out in favor of same-sex “marriage.”

Massive Reuters poll finds only 41 percent support ‘gay marriage’

Pro-family citizens march in Washington, D.C., to uphold marriage as one-man, one-woman. If the Republican Party wants to gain minority voters, perhaps it should strengthen, not weaken, it’s pro-natural-marriage advocacy and speak out against the “gay” activist proposition that compares rights based on homosexuality to real civil rights.

The following is excepted from Accuracy in Media; click HERE for the full story:

More Dishonest Coverage from the Pro-Homosexual Media

By Cliff Kincaid, March 29, 2013

A big news story came out of Tuesday’s March for Marriage demonstration in Washington, D.C. But it didn’t make “news” in the major media. As one who covered the event, it was significant that there were so many members of minority groups. This was not a mostly white crowd. In addition to the presence of black, Hispanic and Asian supporters of traditional marriage, there were some notable Democrats, such as New York State Senator Ruben Díaz, and he let people know he was several minorities in one.

“I’m Puerto Rican,” he said. “I’m black, with kinky hair. I am a Democrat and I am a senator. I’m against abortion. I’m against same-sex marriage, and I won the last election with 89 percent of the vote.”

J.C. Derrick of World magazine has a good analysis of how the major media, led by The Washington Post, virtually ignored the March for Marriage. But unless you actually see what happened on the ground, as the thousands of traditional marriage supporters held their demonstration, you would miss the true significance of how dishonest the media’s coverage of this issue has become.

The March for Marriage went by the Supreme Court before returning to the National Mall location where the rally was held. The group has posted a video of excerpts of the major speeches.

Ken McIntyre of the Heritage Foundation wrote a dispatch, with pictures: “Marching for Marriage—and Children.” John Burger of the Catholic World Report estimated the crowd at 10,000. Based on attendance at several rallies in the nation’s capital, I put the crowd size at about 5,000.

Díaz, the New York state senator, led an all-night vigil for the rally of 32 buses filled with Pentecostal ministers and members of the New York Hispanic Clergy Organization.

He was the only Democratic state senator in 2011 to cast a “No” vote on the homosexual marriage bill in New York State and he was the only lawmaker to rise to speak against it. “God, not Albany, has settled the definition of marriage, a long time ago,” Díaz said.

“But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8)

Our sin-sick and sin-celebrating world needs Jesus Christ more than ever. The following is adapted from a tract, “The Romans Road,” published by The Tract League. I have adapted the Scriptural citations to the New International Version of the Bible. When you click on the verse, it will take you to that verse in its context, courtesy of Bible Gateway. If you have strayed from God, why not use Easter as a starting point to renew your relationship with Him? God bless you, and have a Blessed Easter! — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

_____________________________

I had a pretty good opinion of myself until a friend invited me to take a walk down the Roman Road. He used just a single book in the Bible to open my eyes to my relationship with God, and I haven’t been the same since.

He warned me that the trip might hurt, and he was right because he started by revealing my real status before God:

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God…. (Romans 3:23)

Then I learned of sin’s penalty:

For the wages of sin is death… (Romans 6:23a)

He went on to tell me that God loves me so much He offers an alternative called ‘eternal life’:

…but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:23b)

Then he showed me how God provided His son Jesus as an atoning sacrifice for my sin. Jesus took my penalty!

But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)

I wondered if God would accept me. He assured me with even more good news:

For, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Romans 10:13)

My friend showed me what I should do to receive eternal life:

That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

We prayed together, and I gladly accepted God’s gift of eternal life through Jesus. I asked him if there was anything in the book of Romans that could help me with my new life. He pointed to the beginning of Romans 12:

I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer you bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God — this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is — His good, pleasing and perfect will. (Romans 12)

He explained that if I gave God first place in my life, other things would work out according to God’s plan for me. I have read a lot of the Bible since that day, and my friend was right! My life has been transformed. I joined a church and was baptized.

Many verses are underlined in my Bible, but I’ll never forget the Romans Road because a close friend used it to show me the way to eternal life.

That’s why I gave this tract to you today — so you too can know the way to eternal life. If you already have walked that road, please pass this on. News this good is meant to be shared.

More Gospel tracts with varying themes are available for bulk purchase at The Tract League website.

Reporters sound like “gay” activists at homosexual journalists fundraiser in New York City

Contessa Brewer of MSNBC says giving fair coverage to opponents of homosexuality would be like giving “fair coverage for racists.”

By Peter LaBarbera

NEW YORK CITY — MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer said at a “gay journalists” fundraiser Thursday that for the media to give fair coverage to “the other side” of the homosexual rights debate — pro-family advocates who oppose homosexuality — would be like giving “fair coverage for racists.”

“You know what’s so funny about this? When we’re talking about racism, nobody ever says, ‘Do you think there’s fair coverage for racists?’” Brewer said.

Asserting that opposition to homosexuality is objectively “wrong,” Brewer said, “I think that there’s a difference between being objective and being fair.  And sometimes wrong is wrong, and the right thing to do is say when it’s wrong.”

Brewer made the comments in a short interview with this writer at the annual fundraising event for the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA). I attended the “Headlines and Headliners benefit” as a critical observer along with Cliff Kincaid of the conservative group America’s Survival.

Brewer, NBC “Today Show” host Matt Lauer, Today Show co-host Natalie Morales, “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King and other major media TV media personalities attended the NLGJA fundraiser and lauded the homosexual group’s work. Morales, who hosted the event. told this writer in an interview that homosexual rights is “a new civil rights movement.” In her speech to about 300 attendees, she celebrated the advances of the LGBT movement (including same-sex “marriage”) and applauded the NLGJA, now in its 18th year. Noting the media’s key role in the propelling “gay” rights forward, Morales said, “”We’re all united in this cause.”

Among the sponsoring news corporations at the NLGJA fundraiser were: NBC Universal (lead sponsor); CBS News, CNN, Fox News, The New York Times; Bloomberg News, Buzzfeed; and Newsday. The NLGJA raised $75,000 from the event, according to its website.

Following is a verbatim transcript of this writer’s interview with Brewer, taken from a video of it shot by Kincaid:

Q: I’m Peter LaBarbera with Americans For Truth…. We’re sort of on the other side of the issue. We’re for traditional marriage and so forth….My question is: for some in the media, are you afraid that there’s not fair coverage for the other side – [that] now it’s veering so far the other way… that sometimes there’s a tendency to—

Contessa Brewer:— You know what’s so funny about this? When we’re talking about racism, nobody ever says, ‘Do you think there’s fair coverage for racists?’ That’s my feeling about the matter. I think that there’s a difference between being objective and being fair.  And sometimes wrong is wrong, and the right thing to do is say when it’s wrong.

LaBarbera: A lot of Christians, for example, think that racism is a sin, but they also think tht homosexuality [is a sin]–

Brewer: –You know what I say? I grew up as the daughter of a Baptist preacher, and you know what my answer always is? If you think it’s wrong, then don’t do it. Thank you. [she walks away]

Republicans will never “out-gay” the Democrats in pandering to a Sin Movement…

Sen. Rob Portman’s emotional conversion to the homosexual “marriage” cause — which he justified as supporting his homosexual son — plays into the liberal media and “gay” activist narrative that same-sex “marriage” is inevitable.

By Peter LaBarbera for Americans For Truth

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Hillary Clinton, Laura Bush – it seems everyone is embracing oxymoronic homosexual “marriage” these days, or so the liberal media would have us believe. Promoting sexual perversion in the name of “civil rights” is the trendy and “cool” thing to do. If you’ve heard it once you’ve heard it a hundred times: today’s youth (and we all know how wise and experienced they are) are overwhelming pro-“gay marriage” — so it is “inevitable.”

Even CPAC, the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, is getting in the game: last week it allowed the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) to sponsor an entire panel (“Rainbow on the Right”) devoted to homosexuals’ “inclusion” in the conservative movement. Sounding more like a Washington Post “conservative” than a real one, panelist and Post columnist Jennifer Rubin reportedly exclaimed at the panel how anti-homosexual-“marriage” Republicans “cannot be at war with America on the issues of fairness and equality.“ (Prominent opponents of the Homosexual Lobby were excluded from the CPAC-CEI panel.)

In the midst of the CPAC gathering, news broke that Sen. Portman had flip-flopped on homosexual “marriage” because his 21-year-old son Will is a homosexual. Thus Portman succumbed to the emotionalism and illogic that dominate post-Christian America. Employing some awful theology, he kicked God to the curb — as is becoming habit in a land that increasingly mocks its own national motto, “In God We Trust.”

Here is a dose of Politically Incorrect truth: homosexual behavior is sinful (read: always wrong in the eyes of God), unnatural, destructive and yet – thankfully – changeable. To become homosexual-affirming because someone you love announces he or she is homosexual is the antithesis of “tough love.” It’s like telling a loved one who is has a drug problem: “I love you so much that I’m going to send you a five ounces of cocaine every month, because that’s how much I care.”

An imperfect analogy, perhaps, but Portman’s tragic defection and moral weakness play right into the Left’s ubiquitous narrative that same-sex “marriage” is unstoppable. Don’t buy it. In politics and life, only death and taxes are inevitable. Remember that radical feminists used to say that the abortion debate was “settled”; now they’re losing that cultural battle for hearts and minds.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper plants a kiss on Madonna — dressed as a Boy Scout to protest the boys organization’s “morally straight” code. Cooper, an open homosexual, was presented with an award by the homosexual media pressure group GLAAD.

The headline says it all: “Anderson Cooper Kissed Madonna, Dressed In Boy Scout Uniform, at GLAAD Media Awards.” The CNN host did something that was sure to offend the millions of parents who are resisting the homosexual campaign to force homosexuals into the Boy Scouts of America as Scoutmasters or leaders. But in today’s media world, when even some conservatives are losing the will to resist and throwing other conservatives under the bus for standing strong in defense of traditional values, this extremely offensive stunt will be treated as amusing or funny.

“Madonna smooches Anderson Cooper” is one of the headlines. “Anderson Cooper Honored by GLAAD, Good Scout Madonna,” is how Reuters news agency put it.

One story said that Madonna was dressed in a Boy Scout uniform as she presented the Vito Russo Award, which goes to “an openly gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender media professional” who has made a significant difference in “promoting equality.” Madonna’s outfit was designed “to protest over the organization’s national ban on gay Scouts and Scouts leaders.”

This was a deliberate effort to mock the Scouts for standing for traditional values and instructing young men to be “morally straight.” Anderson Cooper went along with the gag by “kissing” the faux Scout.  It was supposed to be cute.

As an Eagle Scout and father of three boys who also had some fun in Scouting, I don’t think it is right to mock this worthwhile program. On Sunday, a young man, 16, was given some time at the pulpit by our priest to announce an Eagle Scout building project on church grounds that he needed support and funds for. His collection baskets were almost overflowing, mostly with $20 bills, from people who wanted to help and see him achieve his desired Eagle Scout rank. This is America at its best. It is something to be promoted, preserved and protected, not mocked.  

But if you make fun of the homosexuals, or call attention to their offensive conduct, you come under attack from GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, and its allies.