Excerpted from Moscow Mayor Calls Gay Pride Parade Satanic, published Jan 29, 2007, by MosNews:

Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov said Monday he would never allow a gay parade to take place in Moscow despite pressure from the West, Russia’s RIA-Novosti news agency reports.

“Last year, Moscow came under unprecedented pressure to sanction the gay parade, which can be described in no other way than as Satanic,” Luzhkov said at the 15th Christmas educational readings in the Kremlin Palace.

“We did not let the parade take place then, and we are not going to allow it in the future,” said Luzhkov who has been in office since 1992.

…Luzhkov thanked the attending head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II, for his support at a time when, he said, the West is exerting considerable pressure on Moscow authorities and trying to promote gay relationships under the cover of creativity and freedom of expression.

“Religious thinkers throughout the world have said that the West has reached a crisis of faith. Some European nations bless single-sex marriages and introduce sexual guides in schools,” Luzhkov said. “Such things are a deadly moral poison for children.”

Continue reading at MosNews…

What Would YOU Do if America Started Censoring Moral Speech like Canada?

In America, we bristle at the idea of speech –– even unpopular speech –– being censored or officially condemned by the government. But in Canada, it’s happening, and the shocking thing is that speech defending age-old, Judeo-Christian morality is the target. Unlike Canada, the United States has a First Amendment, so it will be much more difficult for the Gay Thought Police to prosecute moral and pro-normalcy speech here than there. But they will try. (Click HERE to read the ex-“gay” group Exodus International’s press release opposing new attempts to pass a “Hate Crimes” law that includes “sexual orientation.”)

Already in America, Christian speech against homosexuality has been censored and restricted by the government. (Click HERE to read about the “Philly 11” losing their civil rights case against the City of Philadelphia.) With respect to the story below about a Canadian city councilman who was fined $1,000 for saying, in accordance with his Catholic beliefs, that homosexuality is not normal or natural, I pose these questions to our readers:

I. To the conservative American legislator or Bible-believing pastor — If we ever reached the point where laws were passed banning and fining “anti-gay” speech (it would be termed “homophobic”), would you: A) comply and stop discussing the issue or B) go on voicing and defending your beliefs in public? If you lived in Canada and faced Mr. DeCicco’s predicament, would you pay the fine? Would you apologize to homosexuals to avoid facing a “human rights” tribunal, even if you knew you said nothing wrong?

II. To what extent in American are we buying into the Left’s definition of “hate speech” in the face of relentless pro-homosexual organizing and political correctness? That is, do many of us who oppose homosexual practice as destructive or sinful opt for silence rather than defend our beliefs, because we fear being called a name? Why do we so easily allow defenders of falsehood and historically wrong behavior to dominate the debate? Are we ashamed of or confused about our moral heritage on this issue? Why?

Pro-lifers are bolder in defending life than pro-family advocates are in defending the principled position that homosexual conduct is always wrong, yet changeable. Why? What can each of us who agree with God do to change public discourse so that we who defend natural (biblical) sexuality (in marriage) are as bold as the defenders of perversion?

P.S. To the homosexual activists who read this email — Would you renounce all pro-“gay” “hate speech” prosecutions (like that against DeCicco)?

To all: be honest in your answers and we’ll publish some of them. Write us using our web contact form. God bless freedom. -– Peter LaBarbera

——————————

Excerpted from Canadian City Councillor Fined $1000 for Saying Homosexuality “not Normal or Natural”, by John-Henry Westen and Gudrun Schultz, published Jan 19, 2007, by LifeSite News:

A Catholic city councillor [John DeCicco, pictured left] in Kamloops, British Columbia, who was himself the victim of the crime of vandalism due to his faith, has been forced to apologize and pay a homosexual activist couple $1000…

Strangely, it was councillor who was shown true discrimination worthy of a human rights complaint. In June, the councillor opposed a homosexual pride proclamation, after which his barber shop was vandalized with “Homophobia Die” scrawled on the door of his business…

In August, homosexual activist couple John Olynick and Greg Koll filed a complaint against DeCicco with the human rights commission over remarks he made at the council meeting and repeated in media interviews. In line with Catholic teaching on the matter, he described homosexual acts as “not normal and not natural.”

In the June interview with LifeSiteNews.com he explained, “I’m not against lesbian and gay people, but I don’t agree that I should have to endorse it.” He also said that people can do what they like in the privacy of their own homes, but, he said in reference to gay pride parades, they shouldn’t “go out and flaunt it, in front of people who don’t necessarily agree.”

While DeCicco already apologized for the incident once back in October, that apology was not considered part of the settlement. In addition to paying $1,000 to Olynick and Koll, DeCicco will provide a statement saying his comments were “inappropriate and hurtful to some.” The settlement will allow the councillor to avoid a Human Rights Tribunal hearing…

DeCicco has said the settlement will not change his opposition to gay pride week. “I’m not going to change my view of my stand,” he said. “My public comments have to be a little more refined.”

Continue reading at LifeSite News…

Excerpted from After Breathing Madison’s Air Too Long, City Council Has Endorsed Oath Breaking Because It Doesn’t Like the Definition of Marriage, by Rick Eisenberg, published Jan 17, 2007, by Constitutionally Correct (a resource of Alliance Defense Fund):

They did it – and by a landslide. The Madison City Council voted overwhelmingly to allow city officials to take a special oath of office…

By a vote of 14-4, the Madison city alders (as one local blogger calls them) voted to allow those assuming office to add to the official oath a statement that they took it under protest and promise to “work to eliminate [the state’s marriage amendment]” and work to prevent any discriminatory impact from its applications.

Continue reading at Constitutionally Correct…

According to the Wisconsin State Journal article cited above, the following aldermen sponsored the “special oath”: Alds. Brian Benford, 12th District: Ken Golden, 10th District; Judy Olson, 6th District; Robbie Webber, 5th District; Austin King, 8th District; Brenda Konkel, 2nd District; Mike Verveer, 4th District; Zach Brandon, 7th District; and Mayor Dave Cieslewicz.

Voting against the addition (upholding their oaths of office and respecting the 59% of Wisconsin residents who voted in favor of the marriage amendment) were Alds. Cindy Thomas, 20th District; Jed Sanborn, 1st District; Judy Compton, 16th District; and Noel Radomski, 19th District.

In the words of a university blogger:

You gotta love Howard Schweber. He says exactly what I expect him to in regards to this ridiculous proposal. Madison wants to allow office-holders to basically say they aren’t really going to uphold the constitution when they take their oath of office because of the gay marriage ban…

There’s something entirely disingenuous about swearing to uphold the Constitution of the United States and Wisconsin…except for that one part. And that one, I don’t really like that one either.

And:

…Only a few alders seem to understand what upholding the constitution means, what their oath of office entails. Most other alders displayed a complete lack of knowledge about even basic things, like the difference between state and federal constitutions, their role as elected officials, and the role of an oath. Although I shouldn’t be surprised, I’m still incredibly disappointed.

The other thing I noticed tonight was the incredibly disrespect and open resentment towards Cindy Thomas. It is one thing to disagree with what she says, but to smirk and make snide remarks while she addresses the council is completely out of line. Kudos to her for putting up with it for all these years, and still having the courage to speak up.

Excerpted from Queer Eye for the Ballot Box, by Natalie Hope McDonald, published Jan 17, 2007, by Philadelphia CityPaper:

They’re Out — A list of [Philadelphia] LGBT officials

Ann Butchart
Judge, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia

William Caldwell
City Council, Norristown

Geraldine Delevich
Borough Council, New Hope

Kevin Lee
Borough Council, Lansdowne

Lori Schreiber
Township Commissioner, Abington

Paul Thomas
Judge of Election, Philadelphia

Continue reading at Philadelphia CityPaper…

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the new Speaker of the House, is considered one of the strongest gay rights supporters in Congress and has signed on as a co-sponsor to all 10 gay- and AIDS-related bills dropped in the hopper in recent years.

“She has said ENDA [Employment Non-Discrimination Act] and the hate crimes bills have received widespread, bipartisan support,” said Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hammill. “She said they would be expected to come up quickly.”

It is urgent that pro-family citizens–Republicans, Democrats and independents alike–contact their U.S. Representative and Senators, as well as President Bush, to state their opposition to passage of all pro-homosexuality “sexual orientation” bills in the new Congress. At the top of the “gay” wish-list is ENDA, which we are calling the “ENDA-Our Freedom” Bill because it would use federal power to force businesses to support and subsidize homosexuality and gender confusion (“transgender”: think men in dresses, using female restrooms).

Also on the homosexual docket is a homosexuality/gender-inclusive “hate crimes” bill, which will be the precursor to the homosexual lobby’s ultimate goal of using the state to curtail anti-“gay”/”homophobic” (read: Christian and conservative) “hate speech.”

Beware the Democratic leadership’s bait-and-switch on Capitol Hill. The media reported how key Democrats in “swing” districts–like Christian pro-lifer and former NFL quarterback Heath Shuler (D-N.C.)–won by running away from liberalism and appealing to conservative values. Curtailing precious American freedoms in the service of a “gay” agenda that seeks to radically redefine the family and marriage–and punish people for living out their religious beliefs about sexuality and marriage–was not pominent in their campaign rhetoric. Please start making your voice heard to your elected legislators and President Bush today. — Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION — Contact the White House and your U.S. Senators and Representative with your opposition to these bills.

——————————-

The following is excerpted from New Congress Expected to Consider Gay Bills in ’07, by Lou Chibbaro Jr, published Dec 15, 2006, by the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade:

Top 10 gay bills in Congress

Gay-supportive members of Congress have introduced these bills at the request of gay rights or AIDS advocacy groups in recent years. All of them have died in committee after Republican leaders in the House and Senate refused to bring them up for a vote. The new Democratic-controlled Congress is expected to be more sympathetic toward the 10 bills, but Democratic leaders chose not to place any of them on their agenda for their first 100 days in office.

Employment Non-Discrimination Act: Calls for banning private sector employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act: Calls for giving the federal government authority to prosecute hate crimes based on a victim’s sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

Military Readiness Enhancement Act: Calls for repealing the U.S. military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy so that gay male, lesbian and bisexual troops would be allowed to serve openly.

There are hundreds of homosexual bathhouses across the United States. Men who frequent bathhouses contract deadly diseases which tragically cut short their own lives, the lives of their male sex partners, and the lives of girlfriends and wives. We hope this victory in San Diego will inspire many more citizens to complain and prompt prosecutors to enforce our laws.

TAKE ACTION — Write a note of thanks to James Hartline and to Deputy City Attorney Brian Ziegler (address below) to thank them for their courage in ending this public health threat.

Office of the City Attorney
1200 Third Ave., Suite 1200
San Diego, CA 92101

Reported by James Hartline on Jan 4, 2007:

The James Hartline Report is pleased to announce that a four year war to shut down a San Diego gay bathhouse has been won by San Diego Christians.

According to the Gay & Lesbian Times the bathhouse has agreed to cease operations on April 30, 2007.

2200 Club in San Diego, formerly the Mustang Spa

Christian activist James Hartline and many other Christians have prayed, fasted and fought in the name of their God for over four years to shut down this demonic enterprise.

In January on an international broadcast of the 700 Club, James Hartline took reporters on a tour right up to the front doors of this evil place, in the hopes that more citizens would be involved in shutting its front doors. You can watch that episode by clicking HERE.

James Hartline refused to give up and God has reward him and his fellow Christian warriors.

——————————

Excerpted from Local Bathhouse Agrees to Close in April, by Anthony Baldman, published Jan 4, 2007, by Gay & Lesbian Times:

The 2200 Club has negotiated with the city of San Diego and agreed to voluntarily cease operation on April 30, according to the bathhouse’s general manager, Charlie Sharples.

The sauna and steam club for men has been operating at its location at 2200 University Ave. in North Park for more than two years. Bob Smith and John Tennis Smith purchased the business in 2004.

Sharples, 2200 Club’s general manager for the last year and a half, said the decision to close in April was “strictly a business decision” and that the city has been targeting their business for quite some time.

“They were going to continue to harass us in different ways,” he said. “They were going to send undercover agents in and so forth and then bring criminal charges if they found anyone having sex.”

According to Sharples, about a third of all 2200 Club patrons “lead heterosexual lives.”

“They’re married and have wives and children,” he said. “Those people get scared when they read in the paper something involving the police.”

From the website of Republican Unity Coalition, June 10, 2006:

Jack Danforth Joins RUC Advisory Board

Senator John C. Danforth has joined the Advisory Board of the Republican Unity Coalition, it was announced today by RUC co-chairs Charles Francis and Donald Capoccia. Senator Danforth will advise the RUC on its continuing efforts to support Republican candidates who reach out to all Americans, including gay and lesbian Republicans.

Charles Francis, RUC co-chair, said: “We are honored to have Jack Danforth join the RUC — a gay/straight Republican alliance — dedicated to strengthening a “Big Tent” for all Republicans. Jack Danforth’s life is his message: a life-long Republican conservative and dedicated public servant, an Episcopal Priest, the man who officiated at President Reagan’s memorial service — he is a living hero to Republicans who want the GOP to steer to a principled center. We are so proud to have him standing with us.

“Joining with other RUC Advisory Board members including President Gerald R. Ford, David Rockefeller and Honorary Board Chairman Alan K. Simpson, Jack Danforth will help the RUC reach out to GOP conservatives and libertarians whose bedrock principles include everyone,” Francis said.

Senator John Danforth is a partner with the international law firm Bryan Cave LLP in St. Louis. He retired from the United States Senate in 1995 after eighteen years of service. More recently, he served as United States Ambassador to the United Nations, after serving as President George W. Bush’s Special Envoy to Sudan in 2001. Ordained to the clergy of the Episcopal Church, Reverend Danforth officiated at the memorial service of President Ronald Reagan.

Excerpted from Gay Admirer Thanks President Ford, by Deb Price, published Jan 2, 2006, by Detroit News:

…Pleasantly surprised by how comfortable Ford was talking about gay issues — not a trait I’ve found in many politicians — I asked whether the federal government ought to treat gay couples the same as married heterosexuals.

“I think they ought to be treated equally. Period,” Ford replied.

Trying to get a better sense of what he meant, I pressed on, asking whether he believed gay couples should receive the same Social Security, tax and other federal benefits?

“I don’t see why they shouldn’t. I think that’s a proper goal,” Ford replied.

He also told me that he supported a federal law to outlaw anti-gay job discrimination:

“That is a step in the right direction. I have a longstanding record in favor of legislation to do away with discrimination,” he said.

Amazed at finding myself chatting with the former president, I told him that my first vote ever was for him and he shared with me that he and his wife had gay friends.

Ford also said that he wanted gay Americans to be part of his party.

“I have always believed in an inclusive policy, in welcoming gays and others into the party. I think the party has to have an umbrella philosophy if it expects to win elections,” he said.

Not long after my column about our interview was published, the gay-friendly Republican Unity Coalition contacted Ford, and he agreed to join its advisory board, lending his name to its cause.

…Even in death, Ford, who was an Episcopalian, spread the message that gay people deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.

The Rev. Robert Certain, the priest at Ford’s Palm Desert, Calif., church, pointed out in his homily that when he and Ford had discussed plans for his funeral this past summer, the former president brought up his concern about the growing rift in the denomination over allowing gays and women to take leadership roles: “He said he did not think (such inclusive steps) should be divisive for anyone who lived by the Great Commandments and the Great Commission — to love God and to love neighbor.”

Continue reading on Detroit News…