By Peter LaBarbera

The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, a leftist homosexual organization, honored Frank Kameny at its 2006 Creating Change conference Nov. 8-12 in Kansas City, Missouri. At the event, Kameny referred to Christians with venom, calling them “Christianofascists” and “nutty fundamentalists,” according to an Americans For Truth reporter who attended the conference and heard his acceptance speech.

The author of the “gay is good” slogan, Kameny–whose papers have just been accepted by the Library of Congress and the National Museum of American History–also told conference attendees that “gay is moral and virtuous,” as part of his ongoing crusade to redefine ancient moral truths through catchy activist slogans.

I’ve known Kameny for years. I respect his zeal, but loathe his ideology, just as he loathes mine. He is brilliant but wasted his considerable intellect and talents on homosexual activism, which is a shame. Like others in the pro-family movement, I have been on the receiving end of Kameny’s angry and pointed letters, or should I say screeds, in which–if my memory serves–he would repeat his patented slogan, “Gay is good,” followed by, “Gay is godly. You are neither.” Kameny is a feisty old bird who agreed to sit down with me and Ken Ervin for an extended interview back when Ken and I were both working at Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. One of the things we learned in that interview is that Kameny is an atheist, which makes his “gay is godly” assertion a tad disingenuous. But hey, anything to advance the homosexual cause, right?

From the Smithsonian website: Dr. Franklin Kameny presents a picket sign to Brent D. Glass, Director of the National Museum of American History and Harry Rubenstein, Chair and Curator, Division of Politics and Reform, National Museum of American History. Photo: Harold Dorwin

We’ll have more about Frank Kameny later, but suffice it to say that this man with a penchant for anti-Christian bigotry and questionable sloganeering does not deserve to be honored as a “civil rights” pioneer by America’s national library. Somehow my mind just can’t get around the idea of putting Dr. Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks and Harriet Tubman in the same category, historically speaking, with a homosexual and “fervent atheist” who says “gay is godly” and “gay is moral and virtuous,” just to sock it to the Christians.

TAKE ACTION – If you agree that Frank Kameny’s dishonorable legacy and outspoken bigotry against Christians is not worthy to stand alongside the noble legacy of great Americans like Frederick Douglass, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, please call or write these officials:

Library of Congress
Dr. James H. Billingham, Librarian of Congress
LM-608
101 Independence Ave, SE
Washington, DC 20540
phone – (202) 707-5205
fax – (202) 707-1714
Contact via e-mail

Smithsonian National Museum of American History
Brent Glass, Director and
Richard Darman, Board Chairman
phone – (202) 633-3129
Contact via e-mail

Originally broadcast on the fourth anniversary of Mary Stachowicz’s murder, Peter LaBarbera addresses the contrast between how the media covered Matthew Shephard’s murder and how they covered the murder of Mary Stachowicz, a pious Catholic, by a violent homosexual.

Crosstalk Radio with Jim Schneider

To listen, click HERE.

AN AMERICANS FOR TRUTH PRESS RELEASE

Americans For Truth blacked out the front page of its website today, with the following message:

“The Americans For Truth website is blacked out today, the anniversary of the brutal murder of Mary Stachowicz by homosexual Nicholas Gutierrez. Four years ago on this date (Nov. 13, 2002), Gutierrez raped and sodomized Mary, and stabbed, beat and strangled her to death before hiding her bloodied, mangled body in his crawl space. Gutierrez later claimed that Mary, a Catholic mother of four devoted to her family and her church, had inspired the assault by “taunting” him about his homosexuality—a blatant and bigoted appeal to liberal stereotypes of Christians as crazed ‘homophobes.’

“This screen is also symbolic of the media blackout of the Stachowicz case and the trial of Gutierrez. The same media that hyped the murder of homosexual Wyoming college student Matthew Shepard as a “hate crime” showed little if any interest in Mary’s case—demonstrating that in the eyes of the media, some victims are more important than others.”

“The media drive the ‘gay’ agenda in this country by choosing what to cover and what to ignore,” said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth. “The brutal murder of Mary Stachowicz was no less ‘hateful’ than the murder of homosexual Matthew Shepard—yet only one case, Shepard’s, is celebrated as a ‘hate crime’ and even used as a teaching tool for American schoolchildren. That’s just plain wrong, especially since Shepard’s murder was not the clear-cut ‘hate crime’ it was portrayed to be.” (ABC reported that his killers were motivated by drugs and money, not anti-gay hate.)

On Nov. 3, a Chicago jury found Gutierrez guilty of first-degree murder and rape. He could be sentenced to the death penalty next month.

Focusing on Associated Press’ failure to cover the Stachowicz case (AP ignored the Gutierrez murder trial), AFT has asked people to “tell AP that ‘gay’ victims are no more important than Christian victims. Hate is hate–and that there is no logical reason why Shepard’s case deserves any more coverage than Stachowicz’s.”

TAKE ACTION – Call the Associated Press and ask why they ignored the Mary Stachowicz case while continuing to devote extensive coverage to the Shepard case. Politely tell them that “gay” victims are not more important than Christian victims–hate is hate–and that there is no logical reason why Shepard’s case deserves any more coverage than Stachowicz’s.

by Peter LaBarbera

All murder victims are equal, but some are more equal than others, to paraphrase George Orwell.

On Nov. 3, a jury took just three hours to find Nicholas Gutierrez guilty of the first-degree murder and rape of Mary Stachowicz (pronounced Stack-OH-vich), a 51-year-old Chicago mother of four and former co-worker who attended church nearly every day. Gutierrez, a homosexual, is now eligible for the death penalty, and his horrifying crime is the sort that cries out for that form of justice.

On this date four years ago (November 13, 2002), Gutierrez, then 19, raped and sodomized Mary, and stabbed, beat and strangled her to death before hiding her bloodied and mangled body in the floor crawl space of his apartment—above the Chicago funeral home where she worked and where he had been laid off. For three days, family members and friends searched frantically for Mary until Gutierrez guided police to her body and gave a warped “confession” filled with self-serving lies.

The trial revealed evidence of the brutality of Gutierrez’s murderous assault on Mary: the tip on his hunting knife was bent from the force of his 11 stab thrusts against her body, and he broke 10 of her ribs.

As if his savagery were not evil enough, Gutierrez, a stocky man about six feet tall, and his public defender lawyers effectively blamed Mary for her own murder—arguing that the five-foot-five-and-half-inch tall Stachowicz had attacked him because she was obsessed about his homosexual lifestyle. By attempting this preposterous “anti-Christian panic defense,” Gutierrez’s lawyers played to bigoted and crude stereotypes of religious people as crazed “homophobes”—in a desperate ploy to reduce his sentence to second-degree murder.

To demonstrate the folly of Gutierrez’s defense, prosecutor James McKay showed the jury a crime scene photo of her bloodied and disfigured face—which he mockingly contrasted with the superficial cut sustained by “Mr. Band-aid,” Nick Gutierrez, on the day of the assault.

Thankfully, the jury didn’t buy Gutierrez’s story and took just three hours to convict him.

If you are the typical American—even if you live in Chicago—you probably have never heard of Mary Stachowicz because she simply was not the right kind of victim. Matthew Shepard, a “gay” college student from Wyoming murdered by two drug-induced thugs in 1998—now there’s a victim who deserves worldwide sympathy and fame. Shepard’s is now one of the most famous homicide cases in all of history, thanks to media hype and homosexual activists’ “spin” that:

1) falsely linked his tragic death to the rhetoric of Christian pro-family groups; and

2) erroneously reported that he was targeted for murder “just because he was gay.” His tragic killing is now exploited as a teaching tool to promote acceptance of homosexuality on high school and college campuses across the country. (Six years after the murder, ABC finally did some serious journalism challenging this myth, revealing that Shepard’s killers were motivated by money and drugs, not anti-gay hate.)

A whole industry has arisen to exploit Shepard’s tragic killing, which has been used as a teaching tool to promote the acceptance of homosexuality to millions of impressionable high school and college students across the country.

Enter Mary Stachowicz, who may have been killed, at least in part, “just because she was a faithful Catholic”—not that the media cares. (A recent Nexis media database search on Mary’s name found a grand total of only 13 articles; a similar search on “Matthew Shepard” found 997 articles in the last month alone.)

Associated Press completely ignored the Gutierrez trial, ensuring that it would receive little national attention—despite the heart-rending details of the Stachowicz case. (On the day that Mary’s killer was convicted of murder, her daughter Angela gave birth to another grandchild whom she will never get to see. Mary’s widowed husband Jerry was forced to endure the humiliation of testifying as to when they had last made love, to prove that the semen found on her murdered body was not his.)

Adding insult to injury, as Gutierrez’s trial was going on, AP ran a feature story about Judy Shepard, Matthew’s mother, who was speaking to college students in Chicago about “hate.”

I called AP’s Chicago office to ask why they weren’t covering the Gutierrez trial—right there in the Windy City—after all the attention they heaped (and continue to heap) on the Matthew Shepard case. I was told that the Shepard case is different because that was a “hate crime.”

Such is the folly of the “hate crimes” concept. It is hard to conceive of a greater demonstration of hatred than Nick Gutierrez cutting Mary’s life short in such a ghastly way and then cravenly exploiting his victim’s strong Catholic beliefs as a way to reduce his sentence. Did the “monster” who sodomized and killed Mary do so because she caught him stealing from her purse, as prosecutors argued, or did he fly into a rage after she “taunted” him about his homosexuality (as a headline in the Chicago Sun Times gratuitously stated)? Or was that just a convenient yarn he concocted to save his hide, knowing that the media and some gullible defense lawyers might play along? (The Tribune reported that Gutierrez’s homosexual partner, Ray Scacchitti, testified that “Stachowicz knew he and Gutierrez were gay and never questioned them about their lifestyle.”)

All this could have made for some fascinating coverage of a trial that might have yielded larger questions, such as: Was Matthew Shepard more a victim of hate than Mary Stachowicz? Are some homosexuals so obsessed with others’ approval that they pose a threat to religious people? Are Christians a growing target for “hate crimes” in America? No surprise that the local media failed to pursue these angles, seeing that most big Chicago media corporations march every year in the “Gay Pride” parade.

There is no logical reason why Matthew Shepard should be a household name while Mary Stachowicz, by all accounts a good person who devoted her life to her church, dies unknown—a victim of bigotry and slander even in her death. The ugly truth is too much for most in the media to admit: they would have cared a lot more about Mary Stachowicz if she were “gay,” and if her murderer, Nick Gutierrez, were not.

Well, here you have it: some Wisconsin homosexual activists testify below to the lies and unethical campaign tactics used by the “gay” activist group “Fair Wisconsin” in trying to derail the state’s Marriage Protection Amendment.  This corroborates reports that we heard from Wisconsin of citizens outraged that the homosexual group was intentionally misleading voters into thinking that a NO vote was PRO-marriage (in truth, a YES vote was FOR the Marriage Amendment.)

Despite their dirty tricks and deceptions–and the fact that pro-homosexual lobby in Wisconsin outspent pro-family forces 10-1 in this campaign–the amendment passed easily, by 59-41 percent.  This in the very first state to enact a “sexual orientation” law (back in 1982).  Who says the homosexual movement’s triumph is inevitable?– Peter LaBarbera

Comments posted Nov 7, 2006, on the Fair Wisconsin blog (emphasis added):

At 6:59 AM, Skippy said…

I am not going to take the time to read all of this but… YOU LIED… to so many people… YOU LIED to people who where going to vote no and TRICKED them into voting yes… YOU CALLED PEOPLE AND TOLD THEM TO VOTE NO IF THEY WANTED TO KEEP MARRIAGE BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN… FAIR WISCONSIN DESTROYED GAY COUPLES FUTURES BECAUSE THEY LIED… YOU LIED… YOU FLAT OUT LIED TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE… Why lie… all we want is the truth… Fair WISCONSIN made us out to be fakes… phoneys… and fair WISCONSIN hurt the gay community SEVERELY… NEVER TO BE FORGIVEN… I would like to see Fair Wisconsin Retired… and will not rest until that happens… NO BODY that sticks up for me is going to go around and LIE…

At 2:05 PM, Miss Judy said……I think that Skippy’s comments are histrionic; however, I think Matt’s comment should not be ignored. The campaign was a mainstream – Democrat-style political campaign. As such, I think compromises were made in the name of perceived political expediency. Although we did indeed talk of gay and lesbian couples and their families, much of the campaign downplayed ‘queerness’ and focused on the effects the amendment would have on “all non-married couples”, i.e., straight folks. It’s a dicey path to walk – on the one hand we were asking people to expand their hearts and consciousness and really question why they are so afraid of queer folks; on the other hand we were in effect saying “Don’t think about homosexuals if they creep you out; think about how this would affect ‘normal’ people,” thus tacitly accepting homophobia.
Could we have waged a successful campaign without making these compromises? Probably not. However, we still need to look at these issues head-on, engage in constructive self-criticism and consider their effects, not just dismiss them as givens or necessary evils.

At 4:03 PM, psion9999 said…
I won’t hide my anger at my life being politicized and I won’t hide my hatred of all those who have done so. I’m not strong enough to keep myself from it. But, this is only directed at those who knew what they were doing, and hid behind the face of their religion and used phrases like “protecting marriage from being redifined” to mask their bigotry and ignorance. I pity all the others who voted “yes” out of confusion and because they were directed to do so by their churches. With education, those people can be reached in the future. It is the truly hateful people that will lose out in the end, because I believe that they are vocal and powerful now, but small in number. The youth of today truly will bring a bright future. They are more enlightened in what is truly good and right in society, and they will overcome the bigots and religious zealots in time.

Sandy Rios, president of Culture Campaign, explains what is wrong with homosexual behavior, whether it is Gerry Studds, Barney Franks, or Mark Foley.

Not That There’s Anything Wrong with That [Mark Foley and the GOP]

Originally broadcast Oct 5, 2006, on Moody Radio

On November 13, 2002 in Chicago, Mary Stachowicz, a devout Catholic woman, was brutally murdered and her body hidden for days by Nicholas Gutierrez, a homosexual man she had been witnessing to. Peter LaBarbera, President of Americans for Truth questions why there was little to no media coverage of this trial.

Click HERE to listen.

Thanks to passage of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, the homosexual partner of former Congressman Gerry Studds, D-Massachusetts, will not be receiving federal death benefits or congressional pension. The pension alone is estimated at over $114,000 annually. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth discusses DOMA, Studds, and the drastically different treatment by homosexual activists of the Studds legacy versus their treatment of former Congressman Mark Foley, R-Florida.

Click HERE to listen.