From Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Says He Depends on God Daily, by Richard Szczepanowski, published Feb 28, 2006, by Catholic News Service:

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, who was sworn in last September as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Catholic group in Washington April 21 that there are times every day when he thinks about his dependence on God.

“My belief that there is a God and that he has a plan for me is a major, calming influence in my life,” Pace, a Catholic, told members of the John Carroll Society, a lay Catholic organization based in Washington.

TAKE ACTION — Please call the White House comment line at (202) 456-1111 and express your support for General Pace.

Excerpted from Gen. Pace Should Not Apologize to Gays; Just Telling the Truth, by Phil Magnan, published Mar 13, 2007, by Biblical Family Advocates:

“If there is any apologizing that needs to be done, it’s by homosexual advocates who have drawn millions of young people, including soldiers into a destructive, immoral and unhealthy lifestyle.

“The homosexual community has sold the public their licentious lifestyle in the name of tolerance and freedom when they should be seeking to be freed from it. Ask the person dying from HIV if it was worth having hundreds of partners or if some of the millions who are enslaved to it would like to be free of it. We will find that the Bible warns against homosexuality not only because of the coming judgment, but that God wants people to be free from their bondage of sin through the gospel of Christ. Legitimizing homosexuality and trying to condone it as being natural does harm to the person trying to be free from it and the society that should not be tolerating it.”

Thank God for a man with the courage to tell the Truth. Send General Pace a word of gratitude HERE, for as you can see, he will be the target of much opposition:

“General Pace’s comments are outrageous, insensitive and disrespectful to the 65,000 lesbian and gay troops now serving in our armed forces… It is inappropriate for the Chairman to condemn those who serve our country because of his own personal bias. He should immediately apologize for his remarks.” — C. Dixon Osburn, Executive Director of the pro-homosexuality Servicemembers Legal Defense Network

Excerpted from Top General Calls Homosexuality ‘Immoral’, by Aamer Madhani, published Mar 12, 2007, by Chicago Tribune:

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Monday that he supports the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” ban on gays serving in the military because homosexual acts “are immoral,” akin to a member of the armed forces conducting an adulterous affair with the spouse of another service member.

Responding to a question about a Clinton-era policy that is coming under renewed scrutiny amid fears of future U.S. troop shortages, Pace said the Pentagon should not “condone” immoral behavior by allowing gay soldiers to serve openly. He said his views were based on his personal “upbringing,” in which he was taught that certain types of conduct are immoral.

“I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts,” Pace said in a wide-ranging discussion with Tribune editors and reporters in Chicago. “I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way.

“As an individual, I would not want [acceptance of gay behavior] to be our policy, just like I would not want it to be our policy that if we were to find out that so-and-so was sleeping with somebody else’s wife, that we would just look the other way, which we do not. We prosecute that kind of immoral behavior,” Pace said.

Continue reading in Chicago Tribune…

Proving once again that homosexual behavior (like all sinful behaviors) is changeable…

“I don’t like porn, it reduces the mind, flattens the soul.

“That’s not hypocrisy talking, that’s experience…

“I can tell you that by the time I finished my summer tour
of major [pornography] studios, I was pretty disgusted with myself.

“I’ve moved forward a lot and this past stuff is not something I want to drag into my future.”

— Marine Corporal Matt Sanchez, 36
(formerly homosexual porn star known as “Rod Majors” and “Pierre LaBranche”)
as quoted in Republican Activist Defends Porn Career,
by Alexis Hood, published Mar 9, 2007,
by the pro-homosexuality PinkNews

From Why Christians Embrace ‘Gay’ Porn Stars, by Kevin McCullough, published Mar 11, 2007, by Townhall:

Diabolical liberals are once again showing their disdain for homosexuals, and their lack of love for those who struggle with sexual sin. They are adverse to truth about sexual behavior. And when a sexual sinner is brave enough to say so, liberals become the most homophobic mouth foamers the universe has ever seen.

Take the case of Marine Cpl Matt Sanchez. (Also affectionately known as ‘the other CPAC scandal’.)

Following his acceptance of the Jeanne Kirkpatrick Academic Freedom award he was “outed” by homosexual bloggers (bloggers who write about and engage in homosexual behavior) as being a “Gay Porn Star.”

The reason so many of these homosexual bloggers knew this is simple. They are rabid consumers of homosexual pornography and have spent days, months, possibly years in front of their television screens acting out on the urges within them. They have been enslaved by the unforgiving voices that have told them since birth to act upon every sexual urge they have. The thought of personal sexual restraint is foreign to these bloggers. Thus they have near cataclysmic system failure when someone they believed was homosexual turns a corner in his life and leaves that filth behind.

Writing for Salon.com this week Sanchez spoke about his past and what being employed in the homosexual porn business did to his heart, mind, and life.

Porn reduces the mind and flattens the soul. I don’t like it. That’s not hypocrisy talking; that’s just experience. I sometimes think of myself, ironically, as a progressive: I started off as a liberal but I progressed to conservatism. Part of that transformation is due to my time in the industry. How does a conservative trace his roots to such distasteful beginnings? I didn’t like porn’s liberalism. In porn, everything taboo is trivialized and everything trivial is magnified.

Being in the adult entertainment industry was sort of like being in a cult, and like all followers of a cult, I have a difficult time figuring out when I stopped believing in the party line. I can tell you, though, that by the time I finished my brief tour of the major studios, I was pretty disgusted with myself. It was an emotional low, and the people who surrounded me were like drug dealers interested only in being with the anesthetized in order not to shake off the stupor of being high.

It needs to be immediately understood that Sanchez committed two cardinal sins here.

The first is – he stopped having homosexual sex. The ability to “choose” one’s actions particularly as it relates to which gender one has sex with is supposed to be unchangeable in the mind of liberals. The whole “made that way” argument tends to get decimated when someone like Sanchez simply decides that it is an empty, sad, and destructive life that brings him no joy.

The second is — he began to pursue truth. The maniacal hold on belief that liberals force upon their followers is not based on belief system of absolutes. So little can be trusted, verified, and believed. Sanchez saw it for the first time when he as a Marine reservist was smeared “baby-killer” on his college campus. After his successful and brave fight for free speech at Columbia University, and thus the recognition at CPAC, those who felt threatened by the change his life represents felt it necessary to drag up his pornographic past. He referenced as much in his op-ed.

Why did I become a conservative? Just look at what I left, and look at who is attacking me today. Let’s face it: Those on the left who now attack me would be defending me if I had espoused liberal causes and spoken out against the Iraq war before I was outed as a pseudo celebrity. They’d be talking about publishing my memoir and putting me on a diversity ticket with [a top presidential Democratic contender]. Instead, those who complain about wire-tapping reserve the right to pry into my private life and my past for political brownie points.

The discussion from cable airwaves on Keith Olbermann’s show on MSNBC, to prominent left wing blogs like AMERICAblog operated by John Aravosis, sought to injure Sanchez for deeds committed over a dozen years ago but also to bludgeon conservatives — many of whom are faith-based, Bible-believing Christians for “allowing someone like that” to be honored for true bravery.

The truth is that such criticism shows a fundamental lack of understanding about what the Christian message of redemption is.

Many if not most of these same liberals grew red faced and blasted spittle at those who criticized then President William Jefferson Clinton for engaging in adultery with a much younger intern in the People’s house. The argument, “everybody does it” seemed logical given that his defenders all grew up in the era when the predominant way of thinking was “do what feels good.” But it did not make it right.

Repentance is not merely saying one is sorry. It is a more all encompassing idea of turning away from that which you are sorry for – and going steadfastly in the other direction. Clinton by any generous assessment would not measure up to that.

Sanchez does. His example condemns not only the left’s hypocrisy but its deliberate sinfulness. That is why they must have his head.

Sanchez admitted that he wondered how his outing would affect his future.

By the way, as a political minority on the Columbia campus, people are always asking me, “How can you be a conservative? They’re so hateful.” That wasn’t the feeling I got when I accepted my award. And it’s not what I’ve been hearing from the conservative community since my “outing.”

I am embarrassed to admit that was I worried that my fellow conservatives would distance themselves from me when the news about my film career broke. The opposite has happened.

That’s the way it should be. As my new good friend Bryan Preston reminded us this week, we’ve all got things in our past that we are not proud of. As I detail very clearly in my new book, liberals would prefer us to stay stuck in those terrible behaviors to boost their own egos. God-fearing, Bible-thumping conservatives want us to repent (turn and walk away from). Knowing that one path leads to death and destruction, the other to ultimate knowledge, wisdom, and peace — which side would you say truly cares about the well being of the individual.

So should we be surprised that Christians and conservatives have embraced a man who starred in ‘gay’ porn? Of course not — Jesus would have!

And then he would say to us today, what he said two thousand years ago, “go and sin no more!”

Excerpted from ADF Helps Protect Three Children from Demands of Unfaithful Military Father Who Left Wife for Boyfriend, published Mar 2, 2007, by Alliance Defense Fund:

Court denies father’s appeal for boyfriend to stay overnight while children visiting and for permission to show affection with boyfriend in children’s presence

An active duty military officer who left his wife to pursue sexual relationships with other men failed in his appeal to have certain visitation restrictions to his three children dropped Tuesday.

The mother, represented by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund and the Alexandria law firm Gannon & Cottrell, P.C., the lead attorneys in the case, opposed the father’s request to be allowed overnight stays with his three children while his boyfriend is present. She also objected to her former husband’s request that he be allowed to openly display affection with his boyfriend in front of the children.

“The interests of children far outweigh a man’s desire to be selfish,” said ADF Legal Counsel Dale Schowengerdt. “We are talking about a man who repeatedly cheated on his wife to engage in sexual acts with other men and then left her for one of those men. This father and his attorneys with Lambda Legal then decided to take it a step further and demand that very minimal and common visitation restrictions designed to protect the children be dropped. There’s no doubt the Court of Appeal did the right thing in refusing this demand.”

Kudos to Elaine Donnelly and the Center for Military Readiness for uncovering the latest media “spin” scam — this one involving a Zogby poll whose results were distorted to promote a repeal of the law banning homosexuals in the U.S. armed forces. Turns out in another poll that only 30 percent of active servicemen polled favored — and 59 percent opposed — the idea of letting open homosexuals to serve in the military. — Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION — Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA) is introducing a bill in the House today — mischievously called the “Military Readiness Enhancement Act” — to repeal the ban on homosexuals in the military. Call your U.S. Congressman and Senators today (202-224-3121) and tell them to leave the ban alone, especially during this time of war.

While you’re at it, tell them you oppose creating a federal “Hate Crimes” law including “sexual orientation” and the radical pro-homosexual, pro-“transgender” bill ENDA (Employment Non-Discriimination Act) — both of which soon will be pushed in the Democrat-led Congress.

——————————-

From Zogby Poll Spins Push for Gays in Military, published Feb 28, 2007, by Center for Military Readiness (and reprinted in full with permission):

Manufactured “Momentum” for Meehan Bill

In 1993 Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA) failed in his attempt to help President Bill Clinton lift the military’s ban on homosexuals in the military. An amendment to strike Senate-passed legislation to codify pre-Clinton Defense Department regulations banning gays from the military, which Meehan sponsored together with liberal Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder (D-CO), was defeated overwhelmingly on a 264-169 bi-partisan vote. (Sept. 28, 1993)

Now Meehan is back with similar legislation to repeal the 1993 homosexual conduct law, a statute that has been upheld as constitutional several times. This time Meehan and his supporters are claiming that the military is on their side, pointing to a poll by Zogby International, released in December 2006.

Using classic P.R. strategy, the Zogby news release highlighted the meaningless “comfort” question, “Are you comfortable interacting with gay people?” Of those responding, 73% said they were. But this is an innocuous question, about as relevant to the controversy as an inquiry about daytime talk shows: “Would you rather watch Ellen DeGeneres’ show or Rosie O’Donnell on The View?”

The key question asked of survey respondents was, “Do you agree or disagree with allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military?”

On that question, 26% of respondents agreed, but 37% disagreed. The poll also found that 32% of respondents were “Neutral,” and only 5% said they were “Not sure.”

The 26% of respondents who want the law repealed cannot compete with the combined 69% of people who are opposed or neutral on repeal. This is hardly a mandate for radical change.

Military Knows Best

Polling organizations recognize that respondents who believe a policy is already in place are more likely to favor that policy, while those who know otherwise are less likely.[1] Constant but incorrect assertions that “homosexuals can serve in the military provided that they do not say they are gay” are probably skewing polls of civilians, who mistakenly believe that homosexuals are eligible to serve. People in the military, however, are more likely to understand what the homosexual exclusion law actually says. [See text HERE]

In the most recent poll announced by the Military Times newspapers, in answer to the question “Do you think openly homosexual people should be allowed to serve in the military?” 30% of the active duty military subscriber respondents said Yes, but 59% said No, 10% having No Opinion. The same percentage, 59% in opposition, was reported by the Military Times survey in 2006 (Army Times, Jan. 8, 2007).

A closer look at the Zogby poll reveals more interesting details that should have been recognized in news reports:

• This is the latest in a string of media events orchestrated in a failed public relations campaign announced by gay activist groups four years ago. The Zogby poll news release clearly states that it was designed “in conjunction with the Michael D. Palm Center,” formerly the Center for Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (Dec. 18, 2006). This is an activist group that has promoted homosexuals in the military for years—usually by releasing or promoting various faux “studies” that cannot withstand close scrutiny.

• The poll claims to be of 545 people “who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan (or in combat support roles directly supporting those operations), from a purchased list of U.S. Military Personnel.” But the U.S. military does not sell or provide access to personnel lists. Due to security rules that were tightened in the aftermath of 9/11, personal details and even general information about the location of individual personnel are highly restricted.

• Apparent absence of random access undermines the credibility of the poll, even though the news release makes the inflated claim, “The panel used for this survey is composed of over 1 million members and correlates closely with the U.S. population on all key profiles.”

• Activists frequently claim that the greater comfort of younger people with homosexuals is evidence enough to justify changing the law. If that were the case, all referenda banning same-sex “marriage” would have been soundly defeated. On the contrary, the voters of several states have approved 27 of 28 such referenda, often with comfortable majorities.[2]

Support the Law – Scrap “Don’t’ Ask, Don’t Tell”

Ideologues who want to repeal the homosexual conduct law are determined to impose the gay agenda on the military. This would include the full range of benefits and “sensitivity training” programs to promote acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle and conduct. (Washington Times, Feb. 10, 1993)

President George W. Bush is obligated by the U.S. Constitution to enforce all laws, but he is not required to retain administrative regulations written by his predecessor, Bill Clinton. This includes policy regulations known by the catch phrase “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which were found by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to be inconsistent with the law in 1996. [See related article here]

Problematic inconsistencies between Clinton’s enforcement regulations and the 1993 homosexual conduct law have contributed to years of confusion, and an advantage for activists who want to repeal both. To ensure that the intent of Congress in passing the law is respected, understood, and followed, the Secretary of Defense should:

• Improve understanding and enforcement of the law by eliminating the Clinton Administration’s policy/regulations, known as “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which are inconsistent with the 1993 law that Congress actually passed. (P.L. 103-160, 10 US Code, Section 654)

• Oppose any legislative attempt to repeal the 1993 homosexual conduct law in Congress.

• Ensure that the 1993 statute is vigorously defended every time it is challenged in the federal courts.

• Prepare and distribute accurate instructional materials that include the text and legislative history of the 1993 law.

In doing these things the President and Secretary of Defense should not apologize or be intimidated by civil rights analogies and pejorative accusations. The law deserves support because it respects the human desire for modesty and privacy in sexual matters, to the greatest extent possible, in the interest of encouraging good order and discipline.

As columnist Thomas Sowell wrote in 1993, “Military morale is an intangible, but it is one of those intangibles without which the tangibles do not work.”

For the sake of civilian institutions as well as the military, homosexual activists should not be allowed to impose their agenda on the armed forces. All Americans can serve our country in some way, but not everyone is eligible to serve in the military.

ENDNOTES

1. Report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces, Commissioner Generated Finding 14, p. C-135, referencing civilian and military surveys done by the Roper Organization, Inc., for the Commission, September 1992.

2. David E. Smith, Illinois Family Institute, Nov. 8, 2006.

Update on our previous post…

Excerpted from Air Force Officer Found Guilty of Raping 4 Men, published Feb 27, 2007, by Fox News:

An Air Force officer was found guilty of raping four men and attempting to rape two others.

A nine-member military jury deliberated for about seven hours Tuesday in Capt. Devery L. Taylor‘s court-martial. Taylor gave no reaction upon hearing the verdict.

Taylor, a medic and the former chief of patient administration at Eglin Regional Hospital, faces a maximum sentence of life in prison. Sentencing was to begin Wednesday.

“I am pleased. I am emotional, but I am very, very pleased,” said Maj. Kathleen Reder, a military prosecutor…

Military prosecutors described Taylor, 38, as a serial rapist who met men in bars, spiked their drinks with the “date-rape” drug gamma-hydroxybutyrate, or GHB, and kidnapped them.

Taylor was charged with two counts of attempted sodomy, four counts of forcible sodomy, two counts of kidnapping and one count of unlawful entry.