Rush Limbaugh cites Americans For Truth; honoree’s book touts ‘consensual slavery’; LaBarbera calls on DNC to demand return of contribution

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force “Leather Leadership Award” honoree Guy Baldwin is the “co”-author (with “a grateful slave”) of “Slavecraft: Roadmaps for Erotic Servitude; Principles, Skills and Tools.” The book advocates “consensual slavery.” Will the DNC demand a return of its at least $2,500 donation to the Task Force, whose “Creating Change” conference in Detroit honors Baldwin? Or is the party that overwhelmingly receives the most support from African Americans comfortable with the idea of celebrating and sexualizing “slavery”? This is one form of deviant play-acting that mocks Black descendants of REAL slaves whose servitude was certainly not “consensual,” and trivializes an awful chapter in America’s history. You can listen to the AFA ‘One News Now’ report on the DNC-sadomasochism story by click HERE and then clicking “Hear Report.”

Well, folks, the Party of Perversion is at it again. This time the DNC (Democratic National Committee) — as a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s (NGLTF) “Leadership Council” (Advocate’s Circle) — gave at least $2,500 to the Task Force, whose “Creating Change” conference in Detroit is presenting its “Leather Leadership Award” to Guy Baldwin, an advocate of “erotic” and “consensual slavery.” How sick is that?

We at Americans For Truth call on the DNC to demand their money back from the NGLTF — or they are complicit with the homosexual Task Force in glorifying this disgusting, sadomasochistic perversion that belittles the forced suffering of African Americans under slavery.

The following story from our good friends at American Family Association’s One News Now — based on our initial story about 2008 Creating Change — was mentioned by Rush Limbaughon the air today. More posts on the Task Force’s über-deviant “Creating Change” conference will follow. — Peter LaBarbera
CONTACT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: through their website: www.democrats.org/page/s/contact, or by calling 202-863-8000 or 877-336-7200.

LISTEN ONLINE: You can listen to the AFA ‘One News Now’ report on the DNC-sadomasochism story by click HERE and then clicking “Hear Report.”

One News Now reports:

DNC Sponsors Event Honoring Sadomasochism

Jeff Johnson – OneNewsNow – 2/7/2008 10:00:00 AM

The 20th annual meeting of the nation’s second most powerful homosexual activist group is welcoming some new participants — and a very recognizable sponsor.

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is holding its annual “Creating Change” conference in Detroit this week. Its sponsors claim to have trained more than 30,000 activists since 1988. Peter LaBarbera with Americans for Truth About Homosexuality has reported on the event in the past. “It’s essentially a grassroots training conference for homosexual, bisexual, transgender — and now, it turns out — sadomasochistic activists,” says LaBarbera.

The event originally focused on homosexuals, but has expanded to include individuals who are convinced that they were born into the wrong sex. The event’s handbook even addresses “transgender restroom etiquette.”

“It says that, ‘Each of us can decide for ourselves in which bathroom we belong,'” LaBarbera points out. “And, so, I mean, this movement is now getting so crazy that they can choose their own gender and then the restroom that matches that.”

And LaBarbera says he is not sure if he is more surprised by one of the sponsors of the event or by one of the activists who will be honored. “It’s incredible to me,” he continues. “But the Democratic Party is endorsing an event where they’re actually presenting an award for sadomasochism.”

A sponsorship acknowledgement notes that the Democratic National Committee gave at least $2,500 to help pay for the event. The recipient of the “Leather Leadership Award” is Guy Baldwin, a psychotherapist who has successfully lobbied against treating sadomasochism as a mental health problem.

Somebody call the Thought Police. Americans For Truth has been accused of “transphobia’! Following in the footsteps of the homosexual lobby, but perhaps wearing high heels, transsexual activists have coined the term “transphobia” to wield against their critics. See this article: “More transphobia from AFTAH,” which criticizes our post on the “Transgender Etiquette” being encouraged at the radical “Creating Change” conference being held in Detroit beginning today.

Yes, the destruction of the English language continues apace. Transphobia and biphobia are just two more logic-defying derivatives of the infamous “homophobia” — which was ingeniously concocted and marketed by pro-homosexual activists to advance radical sexual and gender agendas.

Are we afraid of transsexuals, bisexual, homosexuals? No. Do we disagree with their lifestyle choices and the ideologies and agendas they would foist on the nation — even on impressionable children through the public schools? You bet. (Never forget that homosexual/trans activists promote the notion of ‘transgender’ youth — the ‘T’ in the destructive “GLBT youth” equation.) The deliberate conflation of disagreement with fear is one of the more sinister ways in which sexual revolutionaries have “normalized” homosexual ideology and behavior in America.

Below, a British advocate of sadomasochistic behavior sums it up well, as he thinks of ways to inject somethin akin to “SM-phobia” into the popular culture to build support for that particular perversion (emphasis added):

If I may pose a couple of questions for you to answer in your head …

Do you have any moral objections to homosexuals?
Do you have any moral objections to incest?

The majority of people will say no to the first and yes to the second. A brother and sister have the potential for inbreeding, which has serious consequences, fair enough. How about 2 brothers having sex if they are both over 18 and both consent to it? You probably still have a moral objection to it. But why? There’s no hard logical reason why it should be illegal or morally wrong if people choose to do it.

Our moral choices are very rarely actually chosen by us through logical thought processes; they are dictated to us by other people. We are programmed to think that beastiality is sick, paedophiles are evil, incest is disgusting, and until 1967, that homosexuality was just as bad. Maybe some of those things are true, maybe some aren’t.

People used to go to prison for being homosexual. So what’s changed? Homosexuals existed then and they exist now. Something is different now, though… public perception and a fear of being labelled homophobic prevent the general public from dismissing them. And so, gradually, it has become more widely accepted, and is now generally perceived as just a way of life, rather than the evil and disgusting taboo it once was.

As upstanding people, humans are programmed to fear being called anything-phobic. We fear being called racist, sexist, or homophobic, even though the more intelligent among us will admit that we harbour some of these feelings naturally. There are groups of people that fear these words more than any other. Celebrities and Politicians for example, whose careers are perched on maintaining public favour.

Do you get it? Incest, homosexuality, bestiality — they are only wrong because people SAY they are wrong — not because they are objectively wrong. This is a cynical view that rejects transcendent truth and revelation from God.

So next time you get called a homophobe, a biphobe, a transphobe, or an incest-phobe for that matter — sin-wise, that’s right up there in the Bible with homosexuality, according to Prof. Rob Gagnon, author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice and one of the world’s leading authorities on the subject — don’t fret. Just remember that an ideology that relies on name-calling, propagandistic distortions, and psychological intimidation is as bankrupt as the twisted semantics on which it relies to prop up its own myths.

Gore Expresses Support for Homosexual Marriage

By Pete Winn, CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
January 30, 2008

(CNSNews.com) – Al Gore, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and self-proclaimed “inventor of the Internet,” has earned a new moniker: champion of homosexual marriage. And while some observers are excited about Gore’s endorsement of same-sex marriage, the laws at the state level show overall that traditional marriage is supported by a vast majority of Americans and legislatures.

“I think gay men and women ought to have the same rights as heterosexual men and women – to make contracts, to have hospital visiting rights, to join together in marriage,” Gore said in a video he posted recently on the Current TV Web site. “I don’t understand why it is considered by some people to be a threat to heterosexual marriage ….”

Advocates for changing laws to create homosexual marriage welcomed the unequivocal support of the former vice president, who also won an Academy Award for his documentary on global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

“Gore is again pointing the way – and ending exclusion from marriage is one climate change the world will be better for,” said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a pro-homosexual marriage group, on its Web site.

But Gore is simply “reading right off the playbook of the far left,” according to Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, a conservative group that opposes the homosexual agenda.

“This is what we predicted two or three years ago – that it wouldn’t take long for the liberals who went for civil unions or domestic partnerships to move on to so-called gay marriage,” LaBarbera told Cybercast News Service.

As vice president, Gore publicly supported the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which passed Congress in 1996 and was signed into law by President Clinton. In 2000, when he ran for president, Gore announced his support for civil unions.

LaBarbera said it is easier for liberals to make the jump from support of civil unions to support for full-scale same-sex marriage than it is to go “from zero to marriage.”

“Anybody who is being realistic would see that the liberals are trending toward homosexual marriage,” he added.

Click HERE to read the entire CNSNews.com article, “Gore Expresses Support for Homosexual Marriage.”

This is an oldie but a goodie from the brilliant, politically incorrect (lesbian) feminist Camille Paglia, from her 1998 online Salon Q&A column “Ask Camille.” Now, before you think we’ve sold our conservative souls and are ready to join the Wayne Besen Homosexual Hysteria Club so we can start smearing ex-gays, ridiculing common sense, and destroying traditional marriage — no, we are not sanctioning lesbianism by posting this piece. (Personally, my hope would be that Paglia would outgrow lesbianism, but that’s another essay.) She just makes some refreshing observations that, frankly, we wish more traditionalists would make. (And Paglia has always opposed the Gay Left’s totalitarian impulse by defending the free speech righs of opponents of homosexuality.) 

Of course, the problem Paglia addresses below has only grown exponentially worse in the decade since she wrote this.– Peter LaBarbera

Emphasis is added below:

Dear Camille:

I am a black, conservative female. I am proud to say that you are one of my heroes. I would like your opinion of the following press release, which I am forwarding to you. It’s regarding the Gay Youth Pride Day. Now, according to some, I may have no right to have an opinion about this, because of my heterosexuality. However, I think some in the so-called “gay community” take this pride thing a bit too far. As a 19-year-old, openly straight female, I really don’t understand the need for the self-anointed leaders of the gay rights movement to draw gay youngsters into their self-indulgent politics. Am I misguided or insensitive in my approach to the “young gay dilemma”?

Your conservative admirer in Va.
Dear Conservative:

The psychological turmoil of adolescents at sexual awakening cannot be underestimated. Everything is in flux — impulses, fears, dreams, with simultaneous longings for independence and for protection by adults. What I dislike about the push of organized gay activism into high schools is that it imposes a rigid political paradigm on a stage of life that is in rapid, painful transition for everyone, gay or straight.

As an equity feminist, as well as an open lesbian, I oppose special protections for any group, including my own. Teachers and administrators should obviously not permit physical harassment of any kind on school property, but verbal epithets, however offensive or hurtful, have First Amendment protection. The PC thought police, having been defeated on college campuses after the court-ordered banning of the fascist speech codes, are now oozing their way into high schools. “Hate” cannot be stopped by authoritarian manipulation but by slow social change, which may take generations.

The Internet has been a boon to lonely gay teens in geographically remote areas — but, of course, computers still remain largely a white middle-class luxury. I find very suspicious the statistics about teen suicides with which gay activists badger the media. If gay teens are indeed attempting suicide at a higher rate than straight teens, perhaps more questions need to be asked about the genesis of homosexuality. The intolerable sense of isolation may precede the homosexuality, rather than vice versa.

I have written repeatedly about my theory that homosexuality is an adaptation, rather than an innate trait, and that it is reinforced by habit. With its cant terms of “oppression” and “bigotry,” gay activism, encouraged by the scientific illiteracy of academic postmodernism, wants to deny that there is a heterosexual norm. This is madness. We need more art and history and less politics in primary education. Art gives the young the psychological and spiritual tools for authentic self-discovery. And art is where sexual dissenters have contributed the most to the human record.

In short, I agree with your concern about the Trojan Horse of gay activism, which is being dragged into high schools under the false flag of compassion. Young people who oppose homosexuality for any reason have a constitutional right to express their views, in or out of the classroom. Whatever they may privately believe as individuals, educators have a professional obligation to remain ideologically neutral in their treatment of students.

We apologize: we initially posted to the wrong CWA interview in our initial post: 

Click HERE to listen to Concerned Women for America’s online interview yesterday between Matt Barber and Robert Knight. Less than a week after Reuters drew national attention to a study about an outbreak of the deadly MRSA staph infection among homosexuals engaging in risky behavior, follow-up articles started appearing that seemed to downplay the findings, attack the researchers and demonize pro-family groups that commented on it. Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, and Knight, Director of the Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute, discuss these often-used tactics by radical homosexuals to avoid inconvenient truths. You can also go HERE to CWA’s website to listen to or download the interview.

Barber did a previous interview with AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera, which you can listen to by clicking HERE, or by connecting from this page on the CWA website.

 ACLU’s homosexual Executive Director, Anthony Romero. Read the ACLU’s outrageous, pro-bathroom-sex legal brief here: http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/freespeech/craig_v_minnesota_acluamicus.pdf.
  
By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, could any of us on the Right make up something this nutty, this extreme? The ACLU is defending DEVIANT SEX IN PUBLIC BATHROOMS as a “privacy right.” This was too much even for lefty MSNBC “Countdown” host Keith Olbermann, who makes a living slamming conservatives. Here’s a paragraph from their amicus brief in the Larry Craig case (emphasis added):

Sex is a constitutionally protected liberty interest. … Thus, the government may make sex a crime only where it has a constitutionally sufficient justification for doing so. … [cites the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision striking down Texas’ sodomy law].  The government does not have a constitutionally sufficient justification for making private sex a crime. … It follows that an invitation to have private sex is constitutionally protected and may not be made a crime. … This is so even where the proposition occurs in a public place, whether in a bar or in a restroom.

Activists courts are the tool that the Left has used to advance what pro-family attorney Jan LaRue calls America’s “unholy trinity”: abortion-on-demand, pornography, and homosexuality.  If killing one’s unborn child (with his or her own, separate DNA) can be justified as a “privacy” right; if owning or buying even child pornography can be defended as a First Amendment “right,” then hey, why not homosexual perversion in bathroom stalls?
  
We know enough about the ACLU to assert that even if a homosexual activist (Anthony Romero) were not running the organization, it would have joined this case.  “Sexual freedom” is the Libertine Left’s new clarion call to legalize and expand the “rights” of even the most outlandish perversions: sadomasochistic house parties; the hetero “swingers community”; the “right” of sex businesses to set up shop in your neighborhood; “polyamory” (multiple-partner “marriage,” anyone?); and, yes, even public bathroom sex.

Can you picture the liberal protesters chanting: “FREE LARRY CRAIG”!! “FREE LARRY CRAIG”!!

Wackiness aside, if America’s modern history has taught us anything, it is to take the Left’s legal gambits and cultural aggression seriously.  Using the courts, the ACLU lawyers and their comrades in the Homosexual, Radical Feminist (Abortion) and Porn Lobbies are destroying America, in the name of freedom.

Think about that later this year when you vote for our next U.S. President, who will pick the nation’s highest-level judges. God help us.  

P.S. Click HERE for a great piece on the ACLU’s folly by Brenda Zurita of CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute.

Epidemic Feared — “Gays” May Spread Deadly Staph Infection to General Population Concerned Women for America press release, 1/15/2008

Washington, D.C. — Reuters has reported that, “A drug-resistant strain of potentially deadly bacteria has moved beyond the borders of U.S. hospitals and is being transmitted among gay men during sex, researchers said on Monday.

“They said methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA, is beginning to appear outside hospitals in San Francisco, Boston, New York and Los Angeles.”

“‘Once this reaches the general population, it will be truly unstoppable,’ said Binh Diep, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco who led the study.”

According to the study, at this point, homosexual men are 13 times more likely to contract the potentially deadly, drug-resistant strain of staph infection, but the fear is that, because the infection is spread via skin-to-skin contact, homosexual men may soon spread it to the general population.

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, “The medical community has known for years that homosexual conduct, especially among males, creates a breeding ground for often deadly disease. In recent years we have seen a profound resurgence in cases of HIV/AIDS, syphilis, rectal gonorrhea and many other STDs among those who call themselves ‘gay.’

“The human body is quite callous in how it handles mistreatment and the perversion of its natural functions. When two men mimic the act of heterosexual intercourse with one another, they create an environment, a biological counterfeit, wherein disease can thrive. Unnatural behaviors beget natural consequences.

“In recent years our culture has adopted a laissez faire attitude toward sexual deviancy. Television shows like Will and Grace glorify the homosexual lifestyle while our children are taught in schools that homosexuality is a perfectly healthy, alternative sexual ‘orientation.’ ‘Stay out of our bedrooms!’ we’re often commanded by militant ‘gay’ activists.

“Well, now the dangerous and possibly deadly consequence of what occurs in those bedrooms is spilling over into the general population. It’s not only frightening, it’s infuriating.

“Citizens, especially parents, need to stand up and say, ‘No More! We will no longer sit idly by while politically correct cultural elites endanger our children and larger communities through propagandist promotion of this demonstrably deadly lifestyle.’

“Why does it take a potentially deadly staph epidemic for people to acknowledge reality? Will that even do it? Enough is enough!” concluded Barber.

For Information Contact:
Natalie Bell
(202) 488-7000

And the Punch Line Is …

 Will the ACLU’s bathroom-sex agenda stall?

By Brenda Zurita

Reprinted with permission from CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute, Jan. 16, 2008

Due to the current Hollywood writer’s strike, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has jumped in to fill the gap existing in late-night monologues and sit-coms. If only that were true there might be a joke in there somewhere.

Alas, the title refers to a brief filed by the ACLU in the Larry Craig case in Minnesota. Yes, the senator of the “wide stance” fame has a new defense argument, courtesy of the ACLU.

The Associated Press reported that the ACLU is arguing there is an expectation of privacy when people have sex in public bathrooms.

Hmmm, when I enter a public bathroom I have the expectation of toilet paper being in the stall, not a sex encounter. And privacy in a public bathroom is at a minimum. The gap around the door frame and the open space between the dividers and the floor and ceiling provide only a modicum of coverage. Not exactly a rendezvous spot for randy patrons expecting privacy. It does however make an excellent place for exhibitionists to meet.

Imagine taking your child to a public restroom and hearing two people engaging in a sex act six inches away. Again, due to the construction of the average public restroom stall, there is little that is private. Having an expectation of privacy there is laughable. And what about the expectation of people using the restroom for what is was intended and not being subjected to sex acts?