If you don't want to miss anything posted on the Americans For Truth website, sign up for our "Feedblitz" service that gives you a daily email of every new article that we post. (This service DOES NOT replace the regular email list.) To sign up for the Feedblitz service, click here.
Will the United States become a magnet for foreign homosexuals?
Pro-family Christian Julio Severo fled his home country of Brazil to avoid state prosecution and harassment on "homophobia" charges. Would Severo be granted U.S. asylum like Brazilian homosexual Augusto Pereira de Souza?
By Peter LaBarbera
Homosexual websites are celebrating that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has granted asylum to 27-year-old Brazilian homosexual Augusto Pereira de Souza, who claims he would face torment and violent attacks if forced to return to his country.
I wonder what would happen if Julio Severo (right), the outspoken Brazilian Christian advocate who fled his country due to escalating oppression against critics of homosexuality, were to apply for applied for U.S. asylum. An article in the “Queerty” blog claims that Brazil is “one of the world’s most violently anti-gay countries … with 180 reported LGBT murders in 2008 alone.” I do not know the accuracy of this information. But here is the problem: already Queerty and other pro-homosexuality activists are citing the case of Souza (whose asylum claim was secured by three students at Columbia Law School’s Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic,” Queerty reports) as good news for Ugandan homosexuals who might want to make similar claims.
Is the United States of America under President Obama going to become the magnet for foreign homosexuals and “queer” activists the world over? AFTAH has condemned draconian punishments against homosexuals (such as “solutions” prescribed by radical Islamists). However, America and the West have no right to impose their decadent, perversion-celebrating values on the rest of the world, and other countries certainly have the right to criminalize homosexual behavior just as it was criminalized in the United States prior to the Supreme Court’s activist Lawrence v. Texas decision. (Anti-sodomy laws remain on the books in many states and laws that do not solely ban homosexual sodomy have NOT been struck down; here is a Wikipedia article which — despite that website’s strong pro-homosexual bias — describes the sodomy law situation in all 50 states.)
Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak did an about-face Sunday night and voted for the healthcare reform bill — and at least one pro-life Michigander isn’t surprised.
Stupak has been touted by the national media as a leading combatant against using tax dollars for abortion. But when the bill was finally put to a vote and Stupak voted in favor, many of his constituents were not surprised. Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan explains why.
“We issued a news release months ago calling Bart Stupak a fraud, because what happened at the last minute from a national perspective was no surprise at all to those of us actually here in Michigan,” says Glenn.
We should have seen Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak’s sellout on abortion and ObamaCare coming. Here is a video of Rep. Stupak, a Democrat, at a townhall meeting with constituents in Cheboygan, Mich., on Oct. 29, 2009. Other “Profiles in Cowardice” abound, as pro-life advocate Jill Stanek reports:
The only pro-life Democrat to change his vote from a yes to a no due to the failure to include the Stupak-Pitts amendment was Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL), pictured [right]. (Lipinski is the congressman for the district in which Christ Hospital, my former employer, is located. His father, Congressman Bill Lipinski, was a co-sponsor of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.)
Remember: the same dynamic (bogus “rights”) that will expand taxpayer funding/subsidies of abortion will also be at work expanding taxpayer funding of gruesome transsexual “sex-change” operations — unless we as Americans act to stop it. To read more of Stanek’s ObamaCare analysis, go HERE.
Already the homosexual activists are boasting that Obama-care is advancing their agenda. As sure as the push for “gay marriage” follows homosexual special rights laws, federal socialized “health care” will lead ultimately to taxpayers funding transsexual “sex-reassignment surgeries” (read: gender-confused body mutilations).
And once again, we see evidence of how the Homosexual and Abortion Lobbies work hand in hand, with the nation’s largest homosexual pressure group (Human Rights Campaign) fighting the pro-life Stupak-Pitts amendment. One would think that homosexuals — with seemingly no interest in normal sex and its consequences — would not have much interest in the abortion issue. But here they are crusading for a bill change that will result in federal subsidies for abortion under the rubric of “health care” and “fairness.” (HRC President Joe Solmonese was once a senior staffer at the pro-abortion pac EMILY’s LIST.)
Click HERE for a copy of the Senate health care bill, HR 3590, and HERE for a Table of Contents page — with actual page numbers! — for the same bill, that was written by a Texas citizen. (Apparently Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) didn’t have time to put one in as he rushed the monstrous bill to the floor.) A vote on cloture for the Senate bill is planned for tomorrow, Saturday.) Click here for an excellent Family Research Council alert on Saturday’s cloture vote. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
WASHINGTON, D.C. Thursday, Nov. 12, 2009 — As the Senate works behind closed doors to combine the newly passed House health care takeover bill with two Senate versions that have already passed separate committees, special interest groups are rallying their members to lobby for favored provisions. The House bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (3962), passed on Nov. 7 by a vote of 220 to 215. The Senate’s timetable is unclear, with Majority Leader Harry Reid pledging to complete a bill before Christmas, but many observers say that this is unlikely because of the sheer immensity of the proposal and the growing opposition.
Depends on what the meaning of the word ‘tax’ is: Everyday Americans are starting to get the sense that President Obama and his advisors think they’re just little bit smarter than the rest of us. Conservative and pro-life groups assert that — despite Obama’s protestations — his health care plan invariably would end up using taxpayer funds to pay for abortions and transsexual “sex change” operations.
The following is reprinted from Gary Bauer’s “End of Day Report” put out by the Campaign for Working Families [sign up for Bauer’s excellent email report HERE]:
President Misleads Again
By Gary Bauer
President Obama ran into a problem from an unlikely source yesterday during his television marathon of five Sunday talk shows. ABC host George Stephanopoulos confronted the president on whether the large penalties in the bill ($3,800 per family) for those who refuse to buy health insurance constitute a tax. The president, understandably, was adamant in denying it was a tax. If it is a tax, then he is violating his pledge not to raise taxes on middle class families –– a political disaster.
As Stephanopoulos pressed the point, Obama said, “No. That’s not true, George.” A few minutes later, he objected again, and said, “No, but, but, George, you – you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase.” Stephanopoulos then cited a Webster’s dictionary, which defines “tax” as “a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.” Obama objected again, and told Stephanopoulos that by looking up tax in the dictionary, he was “stretching a little bit right now.” Stephanopoulos gave up and asked, “But you reject that it’s a tax increase?” President Obama responded, “I absolutely reject that notion.”
Homosexual lobby reveals intensive, behind-the-scenes Kennedy role in thwarting popular vote
Sen. Kennedy: Hero of Homosexual Agenda: after his death, a homosexual activist reveals that Ted Kennedy used his massive influence in Massachusetts to pressure legislators to deny the state’s citizens a chance to vote on “same-sex marriage.” After the 2007 vote that blocked a traditional marriage amendment in his state, Kennedy congratulated a leading “gay” activist with these words: “What you accomplished for the people of Massachusetts is tremendous.” What about “the people’s” right to decide whether marriage should be radically redefined? At left is a cartoon published in the Boston homosexual newspaper Bay Windows.
_________________________
Dear AFTAH Readers,
Now that the eulogies are over, it’s time to tell the truth about the late Sen. Ted Kennedy’s unprecedented anti-pro-life and anti-family legacy. Last week I heard FOX’s Bill O’Reilly describe the late Kennedy as a “committed Catholic.” (His guest, talk show host Laura Ingraham, a conservative Catholic, was taken aback.) Certainly, Kennedy was committed, but not to the social positions of his own church. He was a leading crusader for abortion-on-demand — after flip-flopping from being pro-life (so much for compassion and helping the “little guy”). And he used his considerable power to advance the full, radical homosexualist agenda; click HERE to read the praise he received from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, an extremist homosexual organization if there ever was one. Kennedy was one of just 14 Democrats to vote against the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA), which President Obama is now trying to undo.
Tragically, Ted Kennedy was a central figure in helping set American liberalism and the Democratic Party on their current trajectory of celebrating a culture of death and deviance in the form of state-sanctioned abortion and homosexuality. In fact, so egregious were Kennedy’s departures from Church teachings that many Catholics, to quote Fr. Thomas Euteneuer of Human Life International, were upset that he was being extolled “with the full honors of a public Catholic funeral and all the adulation that attends such an event.” Also read the Catholic Action League press release: “Kennedy Funeral Mass a ‘Scandal,’ Says Catholic Action League of Massachusetts.”
Oddly, after his passing, we are learning that Kennedy was even more extreme than most conservatives knew. In 1983, he even secretly approached Soviet Communist dictator Yuri Andropov with a traitorous quid pro quo offer to help Andropov confront U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy; the media dutifully ignored Kennedy’s treachery when it was exposed by a British researcher in 1992. And now self-described “queer” activists are revealing the full extent of Kennedy’s efforts to advance their God-defying agenda. How strange that a Catholic would be so committed to denying the people of his own state a chance to vote on whether marriage should be redefined to accommodate homosexual relationships, which his own Catholic Church describes as sinful and disordered. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
Major homosexual activist reveals Ted Kennedy’s crucial role in defeating Marriage Amendment in Massachusetts Legislature
By Brian Camenker
Sen. Ted Kennedy was the secret critical force in the background that caused the Massachusetts Legislature to deny the people the right to vote on the Marriage Amendment, it was revealed this week.
Less than 48 hours after Kennedy’s passing, the homosexual newspaper Bay Windows published an article by Marc Solomon, who at that time ran MassEquality, the main homosexual lobby group trying to stop the amendment.
Ted Kennedy personally pressured enough conservative Democrats (and even “libertarian-leaning” Republicans) who the homosexual lobby was targeting, to change their votes on that the measure to allow a public vote would be defeated. Kennedy also worked on the overall strategy to defeat it. Without Kennedy’s involvement, it would likely not have been defeated the Legislature — and the people would have been able to vote.
Our cause was lining up the votes to defeat an anti-gay constitutional amendment that would strip same-sex couples of the right to marry. A final vote was scheduled for July 14, 2007. Our opponents needed the votes of only 25 percent of the legislature to advance a citizen-led amendment to the ballot. We had lined up two-thirds of the legislature through fieldwork, lobbying, media, literally everything we could think of. But getting those last 15 legislators-those conservative Democrats from working class Massachusetts communities and a few libertarian-leaning Republicans-was very tough. We needed all hands on deck to keep a Massachusetts version of Proposition 8 off the ballot. We needed Ted Kennedy.”Could you get me a list of your targets?” one of Kennedy’s key staffers finally asked me. “Don’t tell anyone I’m asking you for this,” he said. He meant it, and I didn’t.
A few days later, as I was doing my rounds in the State House, a bewildered conservative legislator stopped me. “You’ll never guess who left me a message about gay marriage,” he said. “Ted Kennedy.” And then I started to hear similar refrains again and again. We’d get word that he’d spoken to the Governor, the Speaker of the House, the Senate President, the chair of the Democratic Party, asking for updates, strategizing, figuring out exactly what he could do and how he could be most helpful.
In the end, on that July 14, we won. We won what many thought was an impossible victory, by a vote of 151 – 45, keeping our opponents just below the 25 percent threshold. We shocked our opponents. They were sure they had the votes. Just the kind of come-from-behind, unexpected victory for the little guy that Kennedy relished so much.
Later that day, after rallies, celebrations, and parties, I sat down at my desk and listened to voice messages of congratulations, one after the next. One moved me to my core.
“Marc, Ted Kennedy calling from Washington, DC. Congratulations on what you did today. What you accomplished for the people of Massachusetts is tremendous. Good work, my friend.”
It’s interesting — and pretty shameful — that Kennedy obviously wanted to keep this a secret. If he was so proud of his “principled” stands, why not make them public? The truth is that Ted Kennedy was much more radical than most people realized (on this and other issues). A lot of insiders knew that. But if the public found out it’s pretty clear that there would be a backlash that would be very unnerving, even for Kennedy.
Flood of praise in Boston media
In the Boston media it was a week of nonstop Kennedy adulation. Interestingly, the Boston Herald, which Kennedy once tried to shut down by passing a special federal law, out-did the Globe in gushing coverage.
Hope and change. Right. Below is then-presidential candidate Barack Obama’s July 17, 2007 speech at Planned Parenthood, the world’s largest “provider” of abortions. (Q: What services do you provide? A: We will snuff out the life of your innocent, unborn child, for a fee— minority babies preferred.) It should be remembered that this evil organization is also a leading and aggressive advocate for homosexuality and extramarital sex (check out their reckless “Teenwire” youth sexual advice website).
Obama likes to play basketball, and the head fake is an important part of the game. You try to get your defender to commit with a head or body fake, throwing him off balance so you can move in to take the real shot (or get a clear shot at the basket). “Both Sides” Barack, the candidate, made some pretty good head fakes on abortion and homosexual “marriage” during the campaign, and many Americans were fooled. He said he wanted to “reduce the number of abortions” and pretended to be a strong supporter of preserving traditional marriage. (Remember the Saddleback Church debate moderated by Rick Warren?)
Then the real Obama went to the hoop: he championed the radical Freedom of Choice Act to rally his pro-abortion base as a candidate, expanded taxpayer-funded abortions worldwide as president, and now is moving to destroy DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act (signed into law by Democrat Bill Clinton in 1996). But the double-game is getting much tougher for Obama: a growing number of Americans are seeing him for what he is: the most radically left president ever to occupy the Oval Office. Shame on the gullible Christians and religionists who went for his head fakes. We’d be fools to rely on them again to “defend” life and marriage. — Peter LaBarbera
Hollywood Against the “Homophobes”: The 1999 film American Beauty is a good study in Hollywood’s unsubtle promotion of “gay” activist myths. Chris Cooper plays the creepy Col. Frank Fitts, an ex-Marine and “homophobic,” overbearing father who, in a final, dramatic scene, unleashes his repressed homosexuality by attempting to kiss Lester Burnham, the lead character played by Kevin Spacey. The anti-Christian homosexual media group GLAAD has been so successful in pushing such blatant “gay”-affirming messages in film and on TV that one homosexual activist asks: “Do we really need GLAAD as an institution any more?”
You know, it’s pretty hard to play the victim when propagandistic “gay” images and characters saturate the airwaves. But leave it to GLAAD (the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) to try. I wonder though: what about Hollywood and EX-“gays”? (GLAAD fails to see the hypocrisy of its ongoing “defamation” of them.) It took decades after Roe v. Wade for Hollywood to produce movies like Juno that are unapologetically pro-life. How long will it take for the entertainment industry to catch up with reality and cast a sympathetic former homosexual character who is content with his sexuality? — Peter LaBarbera
I’m really wondering whether we need GLAAD anymore. They’ve just released their Network Responsibility Index for 2008-09 to “serve as a road map toward increasing fair, accurate and inclusive LGBT media representations.” ABC led the pack among networks; of its 1,146.5 total hours of primetime programming, 269.5 hours (24%) included LGBT impressions. The CW came in second with 138 LGBT-inclusive hours, or 20% of its primetime offerings. CBS gave us the back of their hand, devoting only 60 hours — 5% of its schedule — to us. For shame.
