Question and answer fit homosexual activist narrative; Kelly’s and Fox News’ pro-“gay” evolution continues

TAKE ACTION: Contact Fox News and urge the network to stop promoting homosexual “marriage” and the rest of the LGBT agenda (as Megyn Kelly, Dana Perino and other on-air personalities are doing). Call 888-369-4762 or use their Online Contact Form. Or e-mail Fox News at comments@foxnewsinsider.com. Download a PDF of the author’s in-depth 2013 report on Fox News’ pro-“gay” bias HERE.

_______________________________

By Peter LaBarbera; @PeterLaBarbera

In a nation that professes to be “under God” but is teetering on the edge of moral collapse, perhaps it was inevitable that–in the most watched U.S. primary political debate ever–the opportunity for candidates to defend marriage between a man and a woman would get short shrift.

Fox News prime time star Megyn Kelly, one of the three debate moderators at the Fox-sponsored Republican presidential primary debate August 6, may be known as a tiger for her tough questioning of guests, but when it came to her team’s debate question on homosexual “marriage,” she was a pussycat for the LGBT Lobby, asking a hypothetical that evoked sympathy for the homosexual cause. Sadly, this has become a trend with Kelly and Fox News, which, as this writer has documented (see report HERE or at right), increasingly has a pro-“gay” bias.

According to a Pew Research study in 2013, Fox News ran more stories that were biased towards homosexual “marriage” rather than against it (see Page 2). And Fox News also funds the advocacy-oriented National and Lesbian Journalists Association (NLGJA) every year; Kelly and other Fox journalists have attended NLGJA fund-raisers in support of the homosexual organization.

In the days leading up to Thursday’s prime time debate in Cleveland, Fox News anchors had been telling us how hard they were laboring to prepare penetrating, specific questions that would prevent their GOP targets from being evasive.

Electoral politics led by media pundits is pretty much a “biblical morality-free zone”–at least on the issue of homosexuality–as journalists obsess over the political “horse-race” rather than right versus wrong. Many journalists and even some conservatives have become cheerleaders for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender) cause, while others simply bow to the prevailing political correctness.

So I was prepared for the worst as I sat down Thursday night to watch the main Fox News GOP debate, and, well…here is an excerpt of the key prime time exchange on same-sex “marriage,” posed to Ohio Gov. John Kasich by Kelly:

KELLY: Governor Kasich, if you had a son or daughter who was gay or lesbian, how would you explain to them your opposition to same-sex marriage?

KASICH: Well, look, I’m an old-fashioned person here, and I happen to believe in traditional marriage. But I’ve also said the court has ruled —

KELLY: How would you — how would you explain it to a child?

KASICH: Wait, Megyn, the court has ruled, and I said we’ll accept it. And guess what, I just went to a wedding of a friend of mine who happens to be gay. Because somebody doesn’t think the way I do, doesn’t mean that I can’t care about them or can’t love them. So if one of my daughters happened to be that, of course I would love them and I would accept them.

Who knew that the toughest question that the Fox News brain trust could come up with on homosexual “marriage” could have been penned by the Media Department of the Human Rights Campaign?! Some LGBT activists and liberals must have been checking their TV remotes to make sure they weren’t watching MSNBC.

It was telling that the Fox team directed its “gay’-sympathetic query not to a strong social conservative candidate like Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, or Dr. Ben Carson–who likely would have vigorously defended traditional marriage and religious freedom, and assailed the SCOTUS Obergefell ruling—but to “moderate” Kasich, who pathetically boasted about attending a friend’s “marriage” ceremony based on a sexual sin. Coincidentally (or not), Ohio’s U.S. Senator, Rob Portman, a Republican, changed his position in 2013 and backed homosexual “marriage” to support his homosexual son–a theme echoed in Kelly’s debate query to Gov. Kasich.

Now, it goes without saying that parents should love their children unconditionally–Kasich got that part right. But the governor offered no reasons behind his stated opposition to homosexual “marriage”–typical of GOP politicians who avoid discussing immoral homosexual behavior like the plague.

A close friend of mine shared my observation about Fox News’ strange priorities, and astutely noted regarding Kasich’s weak answer:

Kasich’s three-part answer, which resulted from a carefully planted question by Megyn Kelly, could have been drafted by the Human Rights Campaign:

• “I’m old-fashioned….”   This makes natural marriage merely a matter of personal preference, one that could be eclipsed by time and reason.  Anytime a pol starts this way, he is selling out a traditionalist moral stance. Right up there with “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but….”
• “Love everybody”  —  If you don’t go along with the fiction of a brideless or groomless “wedding,” you don’t love people.
• Attended a “gay” wedding – See how tolerant I am, as opposed to all those bigots who voted for the 31 state constitutional amendments protecting natural marriage?

No wonder liberal praise has been pouring in for the Fox News debate moderators (and Kasich)–although the moderators’ aggressive questioning of Donald Trump has drawn most of the commentary and public criticism.

To be fair (and balanced), Kelly followed up her Kasich question with one from Facebook sent in by a social conservative. It dealt with people’s religious freedom NOT to support same-sex “marriage,” and was directed to libertarian Sen. Rand Paul, who hardly hit it out of the park. (See questions and answers in “gay marriage” debate excerpt at bottom.)

But the damage had already been done by the Fox News star’s emotion-laden question and Kasich’s rambling, Chamberlain-esque response, in which he simultaneously extolled his own Christian faith and his willingness to attend a blasphemous, homosexuality-based “wedding.” The one-two punch of Kelly’s “gay”-sympathetic hypothetical and Kasich’s guilt-ridden reply perfect illustrates how conservatives and Christians have lost on homosexuality-based “marriage.”

Megyn Kelly: growing ally of “gays”

First, representing the media—which is easily the most powerful force driving the “gay” revolution–is Kelly, a professed Catholic, the prime-time star of Fox News who seems to be a “conservative feminist.” In a rather creepy 2010 interview with perverted shock-jock Howard Stern, Kelly declined to label herself and said she is conservative on some issues and liberal on others.

As this writer has documented in a 90-page America’s Survival report on Fox News’ pro-homosexual bias—Kelly is increasingly public as an LGBT “ally” who uses her considerable TV power to defend gay/transgender positions. In 2011, she grilled psychiatrist Dr. Keith Ablow and recklessly accused him of “adding to the hate” for daring to question whether female-to-male “transman” “Chaz” (formerly Chastity) Bono is an appropriate TV role-model for kids (who might want to imitate Bono’s transgenderism). Homosexual activists heaped praise upon Kelly for her agenda-driven interview berating Dr. Ablow. [Read about it on pages 25-30 in my Fox News-pro-homosexual-bias report, or watch a YouTube of the interview below.]

It deserves mentioning that Megyn Kelly and Fox News–unlike more liberal media networks–still give voice to Christian conservatives. She welcomes Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on as a frequent guest of her prime time show “The Kelly File”–even as Perkins has been targeted by intolerant, pro-LGBT leftists who demand that he be banned from TV talk shows due to his supposed “anti-gay hate.” Kelly was invited as a speaker at FRC’s upcoming annual “Values Voter Summit” in Washington, D.C., but she is not now on the list of scheduled presenters.

Nevertheless, Kelly’s sympathies on homosexual and transgender issues are not hard to discern. Recently, she took on the role of straight ally/“protector”* of Guy Benson, a newly “out” young, homosexual conservative and political editor of Townhall.com. In Benson’s “coming out” interview with Kelly [see YouTube below], she describes Benson as “very brave” for revealing his homosexuality on national TV, and says her show is a “safe space” for Benson amidst (mostly “progressive”) criticism of him. In a subsequent June interview with Benson–who himself is a Fox News Contributor–after the Supreme Court imposed homosexual “marriage” on the entire nation, Kelly seemed quite taken with the youthful Benson, who applauded the SCOTUS ruling and described himself as “someone who’s gay and Christian.” [See Dr. Michael Brown’s column dealing with the “gay Christian” controversy.]

Read the rest of this article »

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]

Part Two of AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera’s interview with Matt Barber on Liberty Counsel’s online TV program “Faith and Freedom.” This segment focuses mainly on Train Life USA, the wholesome alternative to the now officially pro-homosexual Boy Scouts of America. It aired September 20, 2013; go here for Part One of the interview, which will have five parts:

Here’s a great column by Matt Barber, who sits on AFTAH’s Board. To listen to Part One of AFTAH’s interview with Trail Life USA Founder and Board Chairman John Stemberger, go HERE. To listen to Part Two of the interview — in which Stemberger relates that he was told be a high-ranking Boy Scout official that the BSA’s new “gay”-affirming policy will result in more boy-on-boy sexual contacts through Scouting — go HERE. And here is the link for Trail Life USA; please promote this Christian alternative to the BSA far and wide. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

_______________________

By J. Matt Barber, September 15, 2013

It was Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 6, 2013. The huge hall was overflowing, the convention sold out. Over 1,200 attendees, with many spilling out into the foyer, eagerly awaited the announcement. What would this safe, moral and non-sexualized alternative to the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) look like? With a stirring introductory video came the answer: “Trail Life USA” would now endeavor to “be the premier national character development organization for young men, which produces godly and responsible husbands, fathers and citizens.”The reveal, eagerly anticipated by hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of Americans was met with rousing cheers. “Our mission is simple and clear,” came the official mission statement, “to guide generations of courageous young men to honor God, lead with integrity, serve others and experience outdoor adventure.”

A brief summary from the new scouting-like organization’s website (TrailLifeUSA.com) reads as follows:

“Most guys want exciting outdoor adventure with their friends. We’ve got that! Trips and travel? That, too. Camping. Check. Physical and mental challenge? Yep. And awards? Of course!

“Trail Life USA is a Christian adventure, character and leadership movement for young men. The K-12 program centers on outdoor experiences that build a young man’s skills and allow him to grow on a personal level and as a role model and leader for his peers. Living the Trail Life is a journey established on timeless values derived from the Bible.”

Countless men and boys who once called themselves “Boy Scouts” will now proudly bear the title of “Trailman.”

Back in May, millions of Americans were shocked and saddened when the BSA inexplicably bowed to left-wing political pressure and became something it had never before been: a hyper-politicized, aberrantly sexualized petri dish for social and sexual experimentation.

Created in 1910 to “prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes,” the BSA, on May 23, 2013, tragically voted to welcome into its ranks “open and avowed” homosexuality (boy-on-boy sexual attraction and behavior), thereby disavowing the “morally straight” Scout Oath its members have been sworn to uphold for over a century.

Even worse, and in so doing, the BSA effectively waived the only legal defense it once had to preclude openly homosexual Scout leaders and gender-confused girls from its ranks: religious and moral conviction. It’s only a matter of time until the BSA is forced to capitulate to sexual extremists’ political demands and allow homosexual adults – men who define their identity based upon carnal appetites for other males – to take your boys on overnight camping trips.

Read the rest of this article »

Stemberger says senior BSA official admitted to him that new “gay” policy “will increase boy-on-boy sexual contact.”

Here is Part Two of AFTAH’s interview with “On My Honor” founder and CEO, John  Stemberger [click HERE to listen], who is also President and General Counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council. We apologize for the delays (due to technical issues) in publishing this interview, which was recorded August 15, 2013. Stemberger discusses On My Honor’s upcoming inaugural 2013 National Leadership Convention in Nashville (Sept. 6-7) — where this new wholesome alternative to the (now pro-homosexual) Boy Scouts of America will unveil its new name and logo. The convention is sold out but you can follow the proceedings online for $24 via a live streaming connection (go HERE). Stemberger compares the new organization’s policies to the BSA’s (which he says is slated to lose 200,000-400,000 members). He notes that the BSA has still not issued a policy on “how it’s going to tent” openly homosexual boys (i.e., in camping trips) [listen at 11:28]. He says that one of the highest-ranking officials in the Boy Scout organization admitted to him privately: “This [the BSA’s new pro-“gay” policy] will increase boy-on-boy sexual contact” [listen at 12:20]. Stemberger also discusses his previous work in Florida leading the successful campaign to pass an amendment preserving marriage as one-man, one-woman.  And Stemberger addresses the recent Supreme Court decisions affecting the marriage debate.

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes.  Real Player is not supported and there may be difficulty when attempting to listen with it. Left click once on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show:

8-15-13, John Stemberger, Part Two

This interview with John Stemberger [click HERE to listen], founder of OnMyHonor.net, was recorded today, July 18, 2013. Stemberger describes the formation of a new boys organization that will provide a wholesome alternative to the pro-homosexual Boy Scouts of America (BSA). [Watch an introductory video HERE.] The new boys organization [later named “Trail Life USA”] will be devoted to building good character among boys, centered on biblical principles. The new group holds its first national convention this September after holding a recent planning meeting of national pro-family leaders in Louisville, Kentucky. Stemberger, who is also president and general counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council, led the grassroots coalition effort to stop the Scouts’ tragic cave-in allowing openly homosexual youth members. (He explains how the BSA voting process on the proposed pro-“gay” change was weighted heavily in favor of the Scouts, in part because BSA leaders would not reveal who was voting.)

Stemberger clarifies the membership requirements for boys — saying that no immoral sexual behavior or advocacy of any kind will be tolerated in the new organization. He said if a boy struggles with same-sex issues (or other issues), it will be seen as a “ministry opportunity” in the organization — which, unlike the Scouts, will be explicitly Christian. (Membership will be open to boys of all religions and backgrounds.) Regarding the BSA, he said that within a couple of years, it will be driven by the courts to allow openly homosexual adult Scoutmasters, which will further cripple that once-noble organization. Stemberger said the BSA was done in by the paid “professionals” who ran the organization, who ultimately were not dedicated to upholding the BSA’s principles. Click HERE for Part Two of this interview. [Click HERE for Matt Barber’s column on the opening convention of Trail Life USA.]

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes.  Real Player is not supported and there may be difficulty when attempting to listen with it.  Left click once on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.

7-18-13, John Stemberger

This story quoting this writer is reprinted from the superb pro-family news site, LifeSiteNews. I, along with several other conservatives, hope and trust that this is just a misunderstanding, and that the new alternative to the Boy Scouts — or alternatives, providing other groups form — does not allow openly homosexual boys (“gays”) to join. I also want to affirm that John Stemberger is one of the most effective and accomplished pro-family leaders in America, so I have full confidence that this will get straightened out.

We urge you to subscribe to LifeSite’s daily e-updates HERE, and we will provide updates on this issue. Excerpted from LifesiteNews:

________________________

No ‘Witchhunt’: New Scout Alternative Will Allow Gay Scouts, too, but Emphasize Chastity

BY BEN JOHNSON Fri Jul 12, 2013

LOUISVILLE, KY, July 12, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Boy Scout leaders who bolted the organization after it voted to allow homosexual boys to join have announced that the new group they are founding will also allow boys who consider themselves gay to join – but the new group will emphasize chastity and “principles and values that reflect a Christian worldview.”

John Stemberger, the founder of OnMyHonor.Net – one of the groups leading the formation of the new scouting group, has said, “There is not going to be any acting out, nor is there going to be a witch-hunt.”

“We wouldn’t expect any flaunting, innuendo, gestures or speech,” he added.

Adult leaders will be required to sign a statement affirming Christian beliefs.

But some warn the new guidelines are not distinct enough to prevent moral confusion among impressionable young scouts.

“I do not think it is wise for this new alternative to the Scouts to affirm that homosexual youths are allowed to join, even with the caveat that they won’t be allowed to ‘flaunt their sexuality,’” Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, told LifeSiteNews.com. “Being openly ‘gay’ in any youth organization – especially one committed to wholesome moral values – is essentially an act of activism. Identifying publicly with immoral and deviant sex (sin) and being ‘tolerated’ as such sends the message to other impressionable boys that practicing and identifying (proudly) with homosexual behavior is OK.”

Read the rest of this article »

This is Part Two of our interview with Stephen Graham [click HERE to listen], founder and president of the Utah-based Standard of Liberty. It was recorded May 25, 2013. Graham, a Mormon, criticizes his Church’s stance on the Boy Scouts of America’s (BSA) embrace of openly homosexual boys as members. A montage of audio is played from the BSA’s May 24 press conference announcing passage of the pro-homosexual change — in which Scout executives acclaim the historic shift as advancing the goal of serving more kids in Scouting.

Graham tells how after the decision, his adult son has resigned from his longtime affiliation with a local Scout troop (as assistant Scoutmaster) over the policy change. He reads from an e-mail his son received from his bishop (with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) — using spiritual language to urge Graham’s son to reconsider his decision. Stephen Graham laments the pro-homosexual drift of LDS authorities, but asserts that most Mormons will follow their Church’s new, more “gay”-affirming direction — because LDS members generally bow to their leaders’ decisions. Nevertheless, he says that adhering to principle — in this case not affirming a deviant sexual identity to boys — will lead some, like him, to reject the LDS’ pronouncements in this area.

HOW TO LISTEN: This is an mp3 file, supported in most operating systems by Windows Media Player, Quick Time and/or I-Tunes.  Real Player is not supported and there may be difficulty when attempting to listen with it.  Left click once on the link below to play.  (Please be patient, depending upon the speed of your internet connection it may take a moment to load.)  OR right click the link then “save target as” to download the whole show.

5-30-13, Steve Graham, Part Two