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.
Five Republicans vote Yes and 26 Democrats vote No on House vote to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), an ex-combat-Marine, opposes the effort to repeal the ban on open homosexuals in the military.
Folks, note the bias in this Politico article reprinted below reporting the legislative action Thursday on Capitol Hill to end the ban on open homosexuals serving in the military. Perhaps a large part of the reason that many Americans have changed their opinion on “gays in the military” is that they have been bombarded for the past 15 years with biased media treatment of the issue. (And this Politico article is more “balanced” than most media stories dealing with homosexuality.) I sent Politico reporter Jen DiMascio this short note:
Letter to Politico.com, May 28, 2010
Re: your story on the House repeal of DADT
Dear Ms. DiMascio,
Why did you include no quotes from (non-governmental) pro-family or conservative lobby groups in your story today on the repeal of DADT [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] — seeing that you quote both SLDN [Servicemembers Legal Defense Network] and HRC [Human Rights Campaign] spokesmen?
Fair is fair.
Peter LaBarbera
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
Joint Chiefs’ Letters Should Deter Reckless Vote for Gays in the Military
In response to reports that both the House and Senate will rush to repeal the 1993 law regarding gays in the military, Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness, issued the following statement:
“Some members of the House and Senate reportedly are prepared to capitulate to President Barack Obama’s latest push for gays in the military—made desperate by the ticking of the electoral clock. This is not a ‘compromise’– Repeal is the whole deal. The price will be paid by military men and women whose voices have yet to be heard.”
Homosexuals in the military are about three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals
FRC analyst Peter Sprigg found that the "most common type of homosexual assault in the military "is one in which the offender fondles or performs oral sex upon a sleeping victim." Encouraging open homosexuals to serve in the military will only exacerbate this problem.
A Family Research Council analysis of publicly available documents–the Pentagon’s own report on sexual assault in the military for Fiscal Year 2009, and published decisions from military courts of appeals over the last decade and a half–have shown that there is already a significant problem of homosexual misconduct in the military. This problem can only become worse if the current law is repealed and homosexuals are openly welcomed (and even granted special protections) within the military, as homosexual activists are demanding.
What price will America pay to celebrate “gay pride” in our Armed Forces?
Aubrey Sarvis of the homosexual Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) said it was "not a big deal" serving in the Army as a homosexual way back in the 1960s. The gays-in-the-military debate is NOT about discreet homosexuals serving in the Armed Forces, but the desire of homosexuals to be "out and proud" even in the conservative military culture.
Folks, note how homosexual activist and former Army infantry sharpshooter Aubrey Sarvis of the Servicemember’s Legal Defense Network (SLDN) — the “gay” organization lobbying for homosexuals in the military — answers this question by MSNBC host Chris Matthews on his show Feb. 2, 2010:
MSNBC’s Matthews: “As a gay man, what was it like [serving in the Army]? You were not out in the open, obviously. What was your experience in that regard? What did you learn in terms of this issue of whether gay people should be allowed to serve openly?
Sarvis replies: “Well, by and large, even in the ’60s, Chris, I found that gays and lesbians serving — and most were serving in silence then — it was not a big deal. But all gays and lesbians want to serve openly. They want to be honest about their service to their country. And as Adm. Mullen said today, it comes down to integrity, and every servicemember counts — gay or straight.” [more analysis follows video….]
Sarvis’ comment is most reasonably interpreted to mean that it was “not a big deal” for homosexuals like himself to serve — i.e., they were not harassed or persecuted, presumably as long as they kept silent about their homosexuality. By extension, he may also be asserting that it was “no big deal” to the majority of straight soldiers that there were (discreet, non-public) homosexuals in the Army.
Like Peter Sprigg of Family Research Council, I believe that “homosexuals” [for purposes here: people who practice homosexuality or claim a (deviant) sexual attraction to members of the same sex] should not serve in the military. That is the law. But think back to the days of Arvis’ youth 40 years ago — when homosexuality was much more condemned by society than it is today. If men or women were capable of serving (as secret homosexuals) then — without major difficulties — what is behind the current, politically manufactured “gays-in-the-military “crisis” that supposedly necessitates a revolution in our military conduct policy during wartime?
Throckmorton asserts that proclamations of truth constitute a “considerable offense” [against people practicing homosexuality]. Someone should ask him if he thinks Paul’s “vilification” of homosexuality constitutes a “considerable offense.” — Laurie Higgins
__________________________
By Laurie Higgins, for Americans For Truth
Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton has written a self-serving and exploitative analysis of Letter # 7 in C.S. Lewis’ classic The Screwtape Letters, which Throckmorton correctly sees as a warning to Christians not to allow cultural issues to supplant the central message of the Gospel.
The problem is that Throckmorton uses Lewis’ prescient warning to chastise only those Christians who work tirelessly to counter the spate of lies spewed by the culture on the topic of homosexuality, lies which even our public schools have been recruited to disseminate.
Throckmorton writes as follows:
Screwtape encourages his apprentice to foster devotion to a cause. This then takes him further away from the real encounter with God and the faith relationship. Indeed, if Wormwood’s human “patient” can put movements and organizations and crusading ahead of all else then he is of no real threat to Screwtape.
I think this passage provides caution to those who believe fighting the culture war is Christian ministry. When fighting the culture war becomes more important than a witness to the gospel, then the mischief really begins. Specifically, in the past several years, I have seen people who are so concerned with the “gay agenda” that they overlook cult involvement in people because they are “ex-gay.” Some here in the US who are willing to tolerate the very unChristian stance of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill because, in Lou Engle’s words, ”Uganda has become ground zero” in the fight against the gay agenda.…
Some might argue that I am just as guilty because of my advocacy against the Uganda bill. And I would not take that criticism lightly. My view is that freedom of conscience is necessary for the Church to have the greatest impact. Advocacy for that position is important business but it is not the main business. I doubt that such advocacy will lead anyone away from the redemptive business of the church. On the other hand, my great concern is that culture warring lulls people into feeling that that the cause justifies the considerable offense that comes with vilifying those the church yearns to reach.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is reportedly planning to attach a repeal of the law banning homosexuals in the U.S. military to a Defense Authorization vote Thursday.
TAKE ACTION:contact your members of Congress and urge them NOT to repeal the ban on open homosexuals in the military. (Congressional Switchboard: 202-225-3121).
Folks, Barack Obama and his media sycophants sure sold the American public a bill of goods in the last election about the Anointed One being a “moderate” Democrat. (Which is another way of saying: they lied.) Do you remember Obama and McCain even debating the end of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell”? Of course you don’t because there was no serious general election debate on this issue. (Some might recall CNN’s and Anderson Cooper’s sneaky GOP primary debate trick promoting homosexuals in the military.)
The proudly “Queer” Lobby and its left-wing enablers like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — who truly seeks to impose her San Francisco district’s beyond-decadent values on the nation — know that now is their best chance to overturn America’s Judeo-Christian values system in the law. So they are in a frenzy to enact as much of the “GLBT” (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) agenda as possible. Only the American people can stop them. Demand that your Congressman and Senators tell you how they plan to vote on this issue. You can use American Family Association’s online e-mail form to contact your members of Congress. (Congressional Switchboard: 202-225-3121.) — Peter LaBarbera, www.AmericansForTruth.org
Here is AFA’s E=Alert:
_______________________________________
More Chicago-style politics to ram unpopular vote through Congress Thursday
Repeal of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” resorts to using Obamacare tactics…again
May 25, 2010
Dear Concerned American,
Once again, an unpopular piece of legislation is on the verge of being forced down the throats of the American people.
The Center for Military Readiness reports the House of Representatives plan to undermine the political process (again) and repeal the current “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, allowing open homosexuals to serve in the military.
Linda Harvey founded Mission:America to expose the anti-Christian messages -- including the promotion of homosexuality and gender confusion -- aimed at American young people.
In our May 22, 2010 interview with our good friend Linda Harvey, founder and president of Mission America, we discussed her Christian conversion, which took her on a path from secular advertising professional to faith-based culture critic. Harvey discusses her summer reading over the appalling “recommended reading” list of the the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), and the Left’s largely successful transformation of America’s schools into GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) affirmation zones. She also discusses GLSEN founder (and Obama “Safe Schools” deputy) Kevin Jennings’ manipulation of alleged “gay” victimhood to promote the homosexual agenda in Massachusetts schools.
Here’s another terrific piece by our friend (and AFTAH Board Member) Matt Barber. We should note that (Solicitor General) Elena Kagan’s reported zealousness for the homosexual activist cause does not depend on her being a lesbian. In fact, these days some of the most vocal pro-homosexual activists are “straight” (e.g., actress Judith Light). Ideological bias is the most important factor in evaluating Kagan’s suitability for the nation’s highest court, but clearly a newly seated, suddenly “out of the closet” Justice Kagan–or even a Justice Kagan whose lesbianism is slowly revealed over a period of years–could have extraordinary sway in a “same-sex marriage” case or other homosexuality-related questions before the Court.
For that matter, an officially “closeted” Justice Kagan whose homosexuality nevertheless becomes an open secret on the Supreme Court (wink, wink) could also win sympathy among fellow justices and thus skew decisions in favor of “gay” activism. So Ms. Kagan herself, and not her surrogates, needs to speak directly to this issue. — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org
I don’t see how liberal media-types can write, what with those uncalloused, milky-soft little digits all bundled in bulky kid gloves and all. Oh, when the target of their “reporting” is a conservative politico, or even Tea Party Joe, off come the gloves. But when it’s one of their own––when circumstances require that a fellow liberal undergo a modicum of journalistic scrutiny––its simpatico most sublime. Out with the inquiry; in with the Huggies and tushie powder.
Media, here’s your question: “Solicitor Kagan, do you identify as a lesbian?” Ms. Kagan, your answer is simpler still: “Yes” or “no.”
Pipe down, lefties. Yes, it is relevant. Most liberals would disagree, but despite “progressive” protestations to the contrary, character does, in fact, matter. A majority of Americans still consider sexual morality––or a lack thereof––a pertinent factor in contemplating one’s fitness for any public service––chiefly, perhaps, a lifetime appointment to our most supreme earthly court.
