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.
DeWine closes door on filing motion to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges
NOT IMPARTIAL – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg officiates a homosexual “wedding” before the Court made its decision imposing government recognition of such counterfeit “marriages” on the entire nation. Ginsburg and Justice Elena Kagan, who also officiated a homosexual “wedding” ceremony, lacked the integrity to recuse themselves from the “gay marriage” case as they should have. AFTAH and Grace Gospel Fellowship will host a “Ted Talk” on the homosexual agenda post-SCOTUS’ Obergefell ruling, Tues, Aug. 18, at 7:00 PM, at Grace Gospel Fellowship Church in Bensenville, IL. Click on photo to enlarge.
Upcoming AFTAH Event: Tuesday, Aug. 18: Scott Lively will join Peter LaBarbera, Pastor John Kirkwood and Rev. Bill Owens of the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP) at Grace Gospel Fellowship Church in Bensenville, IL, for a “Ted Talk and Q&A” on: “The Homosexual Agenda and Its Assault on Freedom after the SCOTUS Obergefell Ruling.” Event starts at 7:00 PM; doors open at 6.30; appetizers and light refreshments will be served. Grace Gospel is located north of I-290 on Rt. 83 (Google Maps has it as “Grace-Gospel Center”). The event is free but donations will be accepted.
Grace-Gospel Fellowship 4 North 220 Route 83 (Frontage Road) Bensenville, IL 60106 (630) 834-0550
Folks, this is a long-shot, but worth trying. Our friend Scott Lively of Defend the Family International–who received the AFTAH “Truth Teller Award” in 2011, at the banquet which was terrorized with a brick attack–writes:
_______________________
UPDATED: Scott Lively writes:
Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine has closed the door and said he will not file a motion to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges.
But the battle is not over. There is a meeting with Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette today to ask him to file the motion to rehear the marriage case.
Professor Forte’s memo has also been delivered to the AGs in Tennessee and Kentucky. We have four days and one last chance to overturn this travesty–if just ONE judge is sick, absent, or worried about their “legitimacy,” we WIN.
These Attorneys General have standing in this case, and can file a motion to rehear it. No matter where you live, please call them now!
TAKE ACTION:
A) Call Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette and leave this message:
“Please file a Motion for Rehearing in the marriage case. Fight for the voters in Michigan who passed the Marriage Amendment and for our freedoms.” MI Attorney General Bill Schuette: 517-373-1110 Ask to speak to a supervisor and explain that we have only 4 days left to file a motion to rehear the marriage case and protect our freedoms!
B) Call the Attorneys General of KY and TN. Urge them to file a “Motion for Rehearing” in the Supreme Court marriage case–before Monday, July 20th. Ask them to present the new information about how Justice Ginsburg violated federal law by officiating a homosexual “wedding” after the oral arguments but before the ruling.
Robert Reilly, author of “Making Gay Okay,” will be keynoting AFTAH’s annual fundraising dinner-banquet Sat., Oct. 17, at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL.
Folks, Robert Reilly is one of this nation’s clearest thinkers in explaining the essence of the “gay” debate and the revolutionary LGBT activist campaign to normalize homosexuality and gender confusion in our culture. That is why we at Americans For Truth chose him to keynote our annual banquet Saturday, October 17, at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Reilly–who has impeccable conservative credentials (see his bio below)–is the author of Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything [order it HERE or on Amazon].
In a recent speaking appearance in Chicago, Reilly agreed with this writer that the pro-family strategy of the last decade or so of focusing on a positive defense of natural marriage and avoiding discussing homosexuality is “the losing strategy. That is how we lost.” Reilly said,
“The entire issue is based on the morality or immorality of sodomy. And once you’re no longer willing to address that issue or if you concede that issue, you have lost, and you’ll get rolled on the religious freedom issue as well.”
Amen.
We live in bizarre times in which even some who profess to be “conservatives” are making the radical case for “marriage” based on the sexual perversion of homosexuality. Shame on them for debasing conservatism and Christianity all at once. But I am greatly encouraged that Reilly’s clear and reasoned voice of principle is beginning to rebuild the foundation for an aggressive defense of Truth on this vexing issue–without cutting corners–for many decades to come. We greatly look forward to Bob’s presentation October 17: please mark your calendars and tell your friends! This article first appeared in the Catholic World Report June 27. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH
_________________________
Farewell Reality
Justice Kennedy and the other Justices joining him in this decision have violated the principle of non-contradiction and have passed over into insanity
By Robert Reilly
First published June 27, 2015 by Catholic World Report
Let us be clear about what has taken place in the Supreme Court decision extending homosexual marriage to the entire nation. Justice Anthony Kennedy has led the Court in affirming a denial of reality and in enshrining darkness as if it were light, blindness as if it were sight.
In this he has been entirely consistent. In the 2003 case, Lawrence v. Texas, he discovered a right to sodomy in the Constitution. Then a year ago, in the U.S. v. Windsor case, he fabricated a right to homosexual marriage that obliterated key sections of the Defense of Marriage Act. Now, he has led the decision in removing any remaining provisions in state constitutions or laws that prevent homosexual marriage because he has discovered the right to such “marriages” in the Constitution – specifically in the 14th amendment (which, interestingly, was ratified by states all of which had prohibitions against sodomy).
Each step of the way has required the consideration of the act of sodomy as morally equivalent to heterosexual coitus and, now finally, to the marital act itself. The Obergefell v. Hodges decision has taken the last step in this chain of logic by sanctifying sodomy as a foundation for marriage.
Here’s what is required for one to think this way. The marital act is the highest expression of human sexual powers in that it is by its nature unitive and generative. In Aristotelian language, the full potential of human sexual powers is actually fulfilled – meaning, reached its perfection – in that act. Any sexual behavior that is less than the marital act is by its nature imperfect and a privation of the good of the marital act.
Let us compare it to 20/20 vision in the eye as opposed to blindness. An eye reaches its full potential, i.e. its perfection in 20/20 vision. It cannot see better than that. Anything less than 20/20 vision is a privation of the organ of sight. The further from perfection, the greater the deprivation. Blindness is the ultimate privation of sight. Now if one were to say that blindness is as good as, or equal to, sight, one would be asserting that the privation of a good is equivalent to the good of which it is a privation. This of course would be a violation of the principle of non-contradiction, which holds that a thing cannot be what it is and also be its opposite.
The Supreme Court has now held something similar: that an essentially non-generative and non-unitive act is equivalent to, or as good as, a unitive and generative act. Thus, sodomy and other homosexual acts are as good as heterosexual marital union. Upon this peculiar theory, Justice Kennedy bases his much vaunted freedom for homosexuals to marry. However, the freedom to marry is teleologically ordered by the ends of marriage, none of which can be met by homosexual behavior. The freedom to marry cannot include an abuse of this freedom, any more than the freedom of speech can include the right to lie. But sodomy is to sex what blindness is to sight. It is not only a privation of the good of sex, and therefore of marriage; it is its negation in that is deliberately non-unitive and non-generative. Justice Kennedy and his confrères have therefore violated the principle of non-contradiction. But, as we have already pointed out, this is not the first time. What can account for this consistency?
I’ve had some experience with people suffering from psychopathic paranoia. One very impressive thing about them is that they are usually of greater than average intelligence, and they operate with impeccable logic. Once you understand the premise upon which they are acting, you can see how perfectly logical their behavior is. The problem is that the premise upon which they are acting is delusional – totally unconnected with reality. That is why they are insane.
Justice Kennedy has also operated with impeccable logic, but his premise is totally disconnected from reality. In a way, his view is more disordered than the paranoid person’s distortion of reality because a paranoid person usually will not deny the principle of non-contradiction. Justice Kennedy and the other Justices joining him in this decision have violated that indispensable principle and, therefore, have passed over into insanity. The problem is that the institution in which the Justices operate is not a psychiatric one and they are not its inmates. But they are behaving as if they were; so perhaps it should be.
It is not only the Constitution and democracy that have been traduced by this decision, but reality itself. For the sake of our own sanity and spiritual survival, we must fully resist the Court’s imposition of darkness as light, of blindness as sight, of sodomy as a marital act.
“And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness grasped it not.”
________________________________
About the Author
Robert R. Reilly was Senior Advisor for Information Strategy (2002-2006) for the US Secretary of Defense, after which he taught at National Defense University. He was the director of the Voice of America (2001-2002) and served in the White House as a Special Assistant to the President (1983-1985). A graduate of Georgetown University and the Claremont Graduate University, his books include The Closing of the Muslim Mind and Making Gay Okay.
AFTAH Exclusive: NYC parade belies SCOTUS claim that homosexual marriage “safeguards children”;homo-fascist tells AFTAH president that freedom doesn’t apply to him because ‘you’re anti-gay”
PART ONE: WARNING: Offensive images, expletives and graphic descriptions
Homosexual Sadomasochistic “Pride” – Brought to You by Walmart: This float for the New York city homosexual “leather” bar The Eagle rolls down Fifth Avenue at the New York City “Pride” parade Sunday. Note the black-and-blue flag at left symbolizing “leather pride”–the S&M counterpart to the rainbow-colored flag symbolizing “gay pride.” Sadistic/masochistic “leather” fetishes involve extreme behaviors that glorify domination, brutality, pain and human degradation. This includes “master-slave relationships” in which one partner becomes the “sex slave” of his “master.” Homosexual leathermen revel in some of the vilest practices invented by mankind, including hand-arm-rectal “fisting.” Note the policemen looking on at lower left: one wonders what they are thinking. Photos may be reproduced provided credit given as follows: “Photo: AmericansForTruth.org.”
TAKE ACTION: Call Walmart’s Corporate Offices:
Call Walmart’s headquarters in Bentonville, Ark., at 479-273-4000 and choose ext. 3, then ask for the office of CEO Doug McMillon. Or call 1-800-WALMART (925-6278). Write Walmart online HERE (click the “Community and Giving” option). When I called the first number I was routed to Customer Relations. Send the CEO a fax: fax CEO McMillon directly at 479-204-0798. Urge Walmart to STOP financing the celebration of sexual immorality and extreme gender confusion like New York City “Pride.” Tell them that you are offended as a customer that Walmart would sign on as a top-level funder of a New York City’s debauched homosexual “pride” parade that featured nudity, perversion, vulgarity, gender rebellion and even an S&M float being flaunted in front of young children. See also this past AFTAH article on Walmart’s capitulation to the LGBTQ agenda.
_____________________________
New York City’s annual homosexual “Pride” parade–sponsored Sunday (June 28, 2015) for the first time at the highest “Platinum” level by Walmart Corporation–featured nudity, lewdness, vulgarity and even a sadomasochism float–subjecting the many young children who either marched in or viewed the parade to behaviors and messages that are highly inappropriate for their age and emotional immaturity. [See photos below.]
This AFTAH writer observed most of the parade, which was dominated by major corporate sponsors. One of the bases for the Supreme Court’s stunningly radical June 26 ruling creating a “constitutional right” for homosexual “marriage” is that it “safeguards children and families.” But in truth homosexual parenting harms kids in a variety of ways. It was precisely homosexual (and pro-“gay”) parents who brought impressionable children to observe this highly-sexualized parade glorifying immorality and gender confusion. This is just one example, but a very troubling one, of how “gay parenting” harms children.
I asked a woman who was hostile to me being there about the propriety of exposing kids to lewd behaviors and vulgarity. She said she didn’t agree with everything that goes on at the “pride” parade but that nobody was forcing people to attend it. However, that right to choose does not extend to minor children, who are taken to such bawdy events by their parents and subjected to the perverseness and homo-eroticism that naturally flow from a parade celebrating deviant sex and gender. One such child was a girl standing next to me who appeared to be about 10 or 11; she was evidently dropped off by her father (I saw a man check on her once), who left her alone for hours to view the “pride” parade.
Walmart Champions “Pride” in Homosexuality: Walmart marchers at New York City’s homosexual “Pride” parade carry massive “rainbow flag” symbolizing the celebration of homosexuality, bisexuality and transgenderism (extreme gender confusion). Walmart was a top-level “Platinum” corporate sponsor of Heritage of Pride, which runs the parade and the extended “pride” activities in late June in the Big Apple.
“Gay” Bully Exercises Special Rights
At one point half-way through the parade, as I stood near the corner of Fifth Avenue and 10th Street (near the homosexual “pride”-celebrating Church of the Ascension), two homosexual activists, a man and a woman–started verbally challenging me, escalating to outright harassment. They had figured out that I was not a homosexual enthusiast and were upset that a moral critic was taking photos at “their” parade, even though it was a very public event.
SCOTUS Lacks Moral Authority: AFTAH president Peter LaBarbera (at right) and AFTAH’s Washington, D.C. spokesman Brian Fitzpatrick (at left) hold truthful banner outside the Supreme Court April 28 during the Court’s hearing of oral arguments on homosexual “marriage” cases. To read the Court’s 5-4 decision nationalizing so-called “gay marriage” as a supposed fundamental right, go HERE. Click to enlarge.
Put down June 26, 2015 as a very tragic day in the history of the United States of America–the day our highest court defied the will of millions of voters in many states to impose counterfeit, homosexuality-based “marriage” on the entire country.
Obergefell v. Hodges: Illegitimate, Unlawful, and a Fraud on the American People
by Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson; June 26, 2015
There is simply no other way to say it.
The Supreme Court’s decision today redefining marriage to include couples of the same sex is wholly illegitimate and unlawful. A nullity. Worthy only to be disobeyed.
Anyone who says otherwise — that the rule of law requires recognition of same-sex marriage — is committing a fraud. And any State official — like Governor Robert Bentley of Alabama — who says that his oath of office requires unconditional obedience to the Supreme Court’s mandate to issue same-sex couples licenses to “marry” is mistaking his oath to the Constitution as if it were an oath of absolute obedience to five justices who happen to be sitting on the nation’s highest court.
As Chief Justice Roberts in dissent has described the action taken today:
“Five lawyers have closed debate and enacted their own vision of marriage as a matter of constitutional law. Stealing this issue from the people ….”
And just who are these lawyers? Justice Scalia reminds us that they are all educated at either Harvard or Yale, from the east- and west- coasts, not from the vast middle of the country, and not a single one an evangelical Christian or a Protestant, and then observes:
“The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today’s upheaval would be irrelevant if they were functioning as judges, answering the legal question whether the American people had ever ratified a constitutional provision that was understood to proscribe the traditional definition of marriage.”
Indeed, from the outset of his bare majority decision, Justice Kennedy did not even act like a judge. Rather, he wrote as if he were an existentialist philosopher seeking the meaning of life, as if the “liberty” protected in the Constitution was a personal quest “to define and express [one’s personal] identity.”
But the Constitution is not some philosophical work written by Jean Paul Sartre. Rather, it is a political and legal document designed by America’s founders to secure the unchanging God-given rights to life, liberty, and property which are deeply rooted in the 18th century soil of the nation. Justice Kennedy showed no regard for these fixed principles, opting for an evolutionary approach to law — asserting that the existential definition of marriage changes with changing times.
The Deviant Roots of a Sin Movement: Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s Table 34 showing timed “orgasms” for babies and young children–apparently supplied to him by a child molester. This table appears in Kinsey’s celebrated 1948 book, “Sexual Behavior and the Human Male,” which also greatly exaggerated the number of people practicing homosexual behavior in American society. Homosexual activists seized on Kinsey’s book to argue that homosexuality was widespread and normal. See AFTAH Point 12 below. Click on graphic to enlarge.
There will be revisions and additions to this list, but here is AFTAH’s first draft of core principles and beliefs.–Peter LaBarbera, President, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
______________________________
1) Homosexual behavior and trans-gender rebellion are morally wrong as they defy Nature and Nature’s God.
2) Homosexuality is not the basis for a healthy self-identity; embracing homosexual or transgender lifestyles/behaviors is a very bad and destructive choice.
3) Homosexuality is about What You Do, not Who You Are. Everyone is responsible before God for his or her sexual conduct. “Sexual Orientation” and “Gender Identity”–the notion of an innate or inherent nature centered around proclivity toward sex- and gender-confusion–are the misguided foundations of self-serving “gay” ideology. These concepts seek to justify immorality by essentially removing one’s moral responsibility for his or her actions.
4) Homosexualism and gender confusion are not the basis for civil rights. Equating the campaign for homosexual “rights”and same-sex “marriage” to the Black civil rights movement insults Black Americans and their noble struggle against slavery and institutional racism (e.g., Jim Crow). Christians in past days were wrong to misuse the Bible to ban interracial unions. Interracial marriages produce beautiful children and families; homosexuality cannot produce life. Creating “rights” based on moral wrongs and sexual/gender perversions naturally undermines other people’s rights, especially the freedoms of religion and conscience enshrined in the United States Constitution. As John Adams, the second president of the United States and a signer of the Declaration of Independence, wrote: “[W]e have not government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…Our constitution was made only for a moral and spiritual people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
5) All people as human beings created in the image of God deserve respect; all behaviors and ideologies do not.
6) Unlike race and ethnicity, homosexuality is not immutable: people can pursue virtuous change and leave aberrant sex- and transgender lifestyles behind. Oddly, the same LGBTQ activists who champion men and women who abandon their marital spouse and children to live a homosexual life–or the DNA-defying notion that people can change sexes–often excoriate and dehumanize EX-“gays.” Nevertheless, thousands of people have successfully left homosexuality behind, and their wholesome transformation should be celebrated. Legal and legislative efforts to ban pro-heterosexual change therapy for minors are cruel, antithetical to liberty and parental rights, and demonstrate the totalitarian mindset of homosexual advocates and their allies. [AFTAH highly recommends Restored Hope Network, an umbrella group of Christian ex-“gay” ministries.]
Folks, I will say this about the latest Ryan Sorba video: you don’t need to go undercover to reveal the Democrats’ penchant for embracing any sexual lifestyle that is outside the bounds of one-man/one-woman marriage. More and more social liberals–who always follow the “progressives'” lead–are jumping on the “polyamory” (multiple-partner) bandwagon. Sorba’s description of the video follows the jump and the video. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera
_____________________________________
Ryan Sorba writes:
Published on Jun 22, 2015
Recently, I went undercover posing as a same-sex marriage activist and asked prominent gay activists and Democrats the following question:
“If the purpose of marriage is to confer dignity upon individuals who love each other, then what about polygamous couples who love each other? They should be able to marry too, don’t you think?”
Shockingly, the gay activists and Democrats all answered, “Yes!”
Abusing Authority? Current U.S. Supreme Court: Standing in back (left to right): Justices: Sonia Sotomayor; Stephen Breyer; Samuel Alito; and Elena Kagan. Front row, sitting (left to right): Justices: Clarence Thomas; Antonin Scalia; Chief Justice John Roberts; Anthony Kennedy; and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Click to enlarge.
“The High Court often acts as if it has been entrusted with the raw power to decide for us the most important public policy issues facing the nation.” — William Olson & Herb Titus
The article below is the first in a series on the courts and homosexual “marriage”; the destructive effect of judicially-imposed counterfeit “marriage” on the nation; and how we as citizens can fight back against this immoral legal/cultural juggernaut. We have taken the liberty of putting quotation marks around the word same-sex “marriage” even when the authors do not–as part of our ongoing struggle to preserve the real meaning of words against “progressive” semantic distortions. Yes, it’s a pain in the rear but it’s the right thing to do.
Kudos to attorneys and pro-family advocates Bill Olson and Herb Titus for conceiving of this project and giving so much of their time and energy toward these in-depth articles together. Thanks also to the U.S. Justice Foundation for financing this project. Should you want to help support this important work, contributions may be made to the U.S. Justice Foundation. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera
__________________________
Reconsidering the U.S. Supreme Court’s Authority to Mandate Same-Sex ‘Marriage’
(Part one of a series)
By William J. Olson and Herbert W. Titus
On April 28, 2015, nine unelected lawyers drawn from three elite law schools (Harvard, Yale, and Columbia) listened to 90-minutes of oral argument about same-sex marriage and then retreated behind a wall of red velvet drapes to confer secretly about whether the U.S. Constitution requires that the U.S. Supreme Court impose same-sex “marriage” on the entire nation.
Consider for a moment the process by which that decision will be reached. When the Court decided to hear the Obergefell consolidated cases from the Sixth Circuit, that decision was reached in secret. The Justices consult only with their colleagues and their law clerks, also drawn from elite law schools. When a decision in the case is issued, presumably before the end of the current term toward the end of June, the Court will address only those issues argued by parties and the amici curiae that it cares to address. Its opinion will contain only those reasons for its decision that the Court chooses to reveal. The majority decision may be agreed to by as few as five of these nine justices unaccountable to no one but themselves. And then, the Court will expect the American people to set aside their individual and collective judgment and passively abide by whatever decision is reached — based on a doctrine no where found in the U.S. Constitution–“judicial supremacy.”
Although the Supreme Court’s only constitutional responsibility is to resolve “cases” and “controversies” brought before it, the High Court often acts as if it has been entrusted with the raw power to decide for us the most important public policy issues facing the nation. While the Court would have us believe that those decisions are mandated by faithful adherence to the constitutional text, the truth lies elsewhere. In his autobiography, Justice William O. Douglas provided a glimpse behind the curtain as to how the Supreme Court really works. In his autobiography, he explained that Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes had once explained to him: “[a]t the constitutional level where we work, ninety percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.”
Here is a moving segment from the “Talking Life with Peter Janetzky”radio show March 22, 2015, in which 21-year-old “Amy,” talks about her childhood being adopted by lesbians and raised in a lesbian household. The program originates from Brisbane, Australia. Also see the referenced website, AustralianMarriage.org:
