Pro-homosexual ‘hate’ harasser Daren Lund could still appeal decision

Pastor Stephen Boissoin

By Tim Bloedow; reprinted from ECP Centre website, Dec. 4, 2009

The ECP Centre (Equipping Christians for the Public-square Centre) is very encouraged to see that sanity prevailed in Alberta’s court system with the decision Thursday to overturn the abusive Human Rights Commission ruling against Stephen Boissoin. We are also grateful to have played an important part in the case, raising awareness of the case over the past several years and organizing three successful fundraising dinners in the spring of this year which helped to bring in over $25,000 from generous Canadians towards Mr. Boissoin’s substantial legal costs. We continue to receive donations designated to Mr. Boissoin’s legal defense and we are grateful for the Christians who take their faith seriously enough to be aware of these disturbing cases and who are able to donate to support fellow-Christians in today’s battles.

Those familiar with the case will know that seven years ago, a “human rights” complaint was filed against Stephen Boissoin due to his sharp criticism of homosexuality in a letter to the editor printed in the Red Deer Advocate. In December 2007, the Alberta Human Rights Commission issued a ruthless decision against Mr. Boissoin which itself was an expression of hatred against Christianity. The provincial HRC essentially became a tool for a homosexualist inquisition whereby Mr. Boissoin was ordered to give a false apology for the substance of his letter. He was banned from ever criticizing homosexuality again in public or private communications, and even from the pulpit. The implications of the decision were stunning in terms of the imposition of the state over the church and the restrictions on religious liberty. Mr. Boissoin was also fined $5,000.

Needless to say, Mr. Boissoin filed an appeal of the decision. His legal counsel Gerry Chipeur was very confident that they would win the appeal because the historic principles of fundamental justice were on Mr. Boissoin’s side so, in a real court where such rules applied, the absurd HRC decision wasn’t expected to stand. The plaintiff Darren Lund, however, is reported in the Calgary Herald as not having made up his mind whether to appeal the decision.

Stephen Boissoin vindicated

In his decision, Justice Earl Wilson said that whatever one thinks about Mr. Boissoin’s comments, they didn’t violate Alberta’s human rights legislation which is to say, as the Edmonton Sun reported, that “there was nothing in the letter to suggest it was exhorting Albertans to discriminate against homosexuals in areas of employment, tenancy or goods and services which fall under provincial jurisdiction.” Justice Wilson said, “”Inferring some sort of call for discriminatory practices prohibited by provincial law is an unreasonable interpretation of the letter’s message.”

Millions of young Americans saw this simulated homosexual oral sex act on ABC thanks to Adam Lambert pushing his "queer" lifestyle choice on the rest of us. Lambert deliberately sought to be provocative and characterized criticism of his vulgar stage act as "discrimination."

Folks, we’ll have much more on Adam Lambert and his calculated use of his nationally broadcast American Music Awards stage act to advance homosexual immorality and sadistic perversions in the name of “nondiscrimination”:

Liberty Counsel Files Complaint with the FCC for Indecent Acts of Adam Lambert

November 24, 2009
From the Liberty Counsel website:

Liberty Counsel has filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission against the American Broadcasting Company (“ABC”) for airing an outrageously lewd and filthy performance by Adam Lambert on November 22, 2009 during the 2009 American Music Awards.

Prior to going on-air, Lambert explained that his motive went beyond performing. According to the Associated Press, Lambert “wanted to break down a double standard that existed where female performers are often sexually provocative while men don’t do it that often.”

The Washington Blade (above) was the leading newspaper for homosexuals in the United States. It reported a lot of bad news about the realities of the homosexual lifestyle to those practicing that behavior.  The Blade, Southern Voice, a homosexual newspaper in Atlanta, and other “gay” newspapers closed their doors Monday when the nation’s largest homosexual publishing company, Window Media LLC, shut down.

The following is reprinted from American Family Association’s news service, OneNewsNow [you can listen to Charlie Butts’ audio report by going to the ONN site and clicking the “Hear Report” button at the upper right; also, ONN offers a very useful daily NewsBrief email and topical Web Alert service]:

Newspapers reach end of story

Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow – 11/18/2009

Several homosexual newspapers have closed their doors.

Employees of the Southern Voice in Atlanta and the Washington Blade, among other homosexual newspapers, arrived for work to find the doors locked and a note on the door explaining their jobs no longer existed on account of bankruptcy. Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality says he is not surprised by the closings.

Sexual perversion movements take their cue from the successful “queer” (“gay”) revolution, which has succeeded in convincing millions of people that a human wrong — homosexual practice — is now the basis for government-protected “civil rights.” The following is taken from a “Poly Boston” flier handed out at the annual “Gay Pride” parade in Boston in June 2009, and passed on to us by our friends at MassResistance:

Poly Boston is a big, informal group that hosts events for the polyamory community, and the poly-curious, in the Greater Boston area. We hold discussions, dinner, and socials. To get connected, sign up for our announcements and chat lists and say hi!

What is polyamory?

Polyamory (or “poly”) means having, or being able to have, honest, ethical, respectful romantic relationships with more than one person at a time, with the full knowledge and approval of all concerned. Somewhat similar terms are “open relationships” and “responsible non-monogamy.” …

Read the rest of this article »

Milk-ing the Schools to Indoctrinate Kids: Almost by definition, students celebrating Harvey Milk Day in California will get the politically correct, Hollywood version of his life — e.g., that he was assassinated by a “murderous homophobe” (not true: Ray Sloan — the campaign manager and confidant of Milk’s killer, Dan White — was openly homosexual, and testified that White “supported nearly all of Milk’s gay-friendly resolutions,” according to a liberal San Francisco paper). Milk — who supported cult mass-murderer Jim Jones — is hardly an appropriate role model for children (see Dan Flynn’s City Journal article, “Drinking Harvey Milk’s Kool-Aid”). The Democrat-led push for a day honoring this homosexual activist of dubious character is only the most audacious example of pro-homosexuality liberals using the schools to indoctrination children. 

Folks, we have been slow to comment on all the Harvey Milk hype in our liberal-dominated popular culture — hype that is driving this push for an outrageous California bill that would effectively force students to celebrate a man famous for … being the first “out and proud” practitioner of homosexuality to win public office. (Oh boy: another marker for America’s Moral Meltdown.) The more one reads about Milk (see Dan Flynn’s excellent City Journal piece HERE) and the real story about his murder at the hands of Dan White (see caption above), the more preposterous becomes the idea of heralding him as a “civil rights” martyr.

By Peter LaBarbera

WARNING: Offensive Language (required to expose hateful “gay” extremism)

Lying Leatherman: homosexual atheist blogger Joe Jervis (left) didn’t appreciate that Americans For Truth called attention to the vicious comments posted by his online followers against Patricia Mauceri (below right) — the Christian soap actress who was dumped by ABC’s “One Life to Live” after objecting to a pro-homosexuality story line. And it looks like Mauceri is not the first soap actor to object to the faith-undermining requirements of pro-“gay” political correctness in the business. Blogs like Jervis’ “Joe. My. God.” give evidence that no activists are as mean and hateful as homosexual activists — who project their beef with the Creator (unacknowledged, in Joe’s case) on to His followers.

TAKE ACTION: contact ABC and tell them enough is enough with their promotion of the homosexual agenda and sexual immorality in general. Tell them you are outraged at the politically correct firing of Patricia Mauceri (right). And ask them to cast happy, contented “ex-gays” in major TV roles and sympathetic Christian/religious characters who remain faithful to their faith convictions — for the sake of diversity. 

________________________

Ah, I see that Joe Jervis (above), the non-average “Joe” behind the homosexual activist “Joe. My. God.” blog, has focused his intellectual energies (or should I say bigoted, emotional impulses) into crafting a response to AFTAH’s post about his blog yesterday. We were simply highlighting some of his buddies’ crude and very mean attacks on Patricia Mauceri, the Christian soap actress who says she was fired for objecting to a pro-homosexual story line.

Here is the essence of Jervis’ response:

1. I have a comb-over hair style (ouch — problem here is I have so little hair to comb over — if this were true it would really be an exercise in futility: see tragic evidence at right);
2. I’m really a gay-porn-obsessed homosexual (hence the nickname: “Porno Pete”: this smear term was actually invented by Wayne Besen, the truth-challenged professional homosexual zealot behind the “ex-gay”-bashing group “Truth Wins Out”; some “gay” activists have stopped using Porno Pete in favor of the much more mature “The Peter” — peter being a boyish slang term for the male sex organ);

Reverse Discrimination? How’s this for a timely story for Labor Day — highlighting the current reality that Christians and traditionalists who oppose homosexuality are more likely to be fired or disciplined for their beliefs than homosexuals are for “being gay.” TAKE ACTION: Call your Congressman and Senators next week (202-224-2131; 202-225-3121; www.congress.org) and urge them to oppose ENDA — the Employment Nondiscrimination Act — which would federalize “sexual orientation” law and greatly expand government power to promote the “gay” agenda. ENDA would become a tool for the Left to use the state to force Christian and moral-minded business owners to promote and subsidize homosexuality and transsexuality against their will.

FoxNews online reports:

Soap Actress Says She Was Fired Because of Religious Beliefs

Friday , September 04, 2009
By Lauren Green

If you tuned in to the soap “One Life to Live” this week, you may have noticed there’s been a change of character. One character in particular.

Actress Patricia Mauceri says she was fired and abruptly replaced for objecting to a gay storyline because of her religious beliefs.

Mauceri played the recurring role of Carlotta Vega on “OLTL” for the last 14 years. But when she objected to how the writers wanted her deeply religious character, a Latina mother, to handle a storyline involving homosexuality, she objected. And for that she claims she was fired.

Mauceri, 59, a devout Christian, told FOX News that character Vega’s gay-friendly dialogue was not in line with the character she helped create by drawing on her own faith.

“I did not object to being in a gay storyline. I objected to speaking the truth of what that person, how that person would live and breathe and act in that storyline,” she said. “And this goes against everything I am, my belief system, and what I know the character’s belief system is aligned to.”

Maddow Misinformation: MSNBC’s resident lesbian activist Rachel Maddow (left) lied about Matt Barber’s press statement regarding the potential of Obama-Care to become “Tranny-Care” by mandating coverage for body-disfiguring transsexual “sex change” operations.

Folks, we hope that Rachel Maddow (left) — the lesbian MSNBC talker who is as “out” in her homosexuality promotion as in her left-wing activism — takes up the offer of my good friend Matt Barber and lets him appear as a guest on her show. That seems only fair after Maddow lied about Barber’s statement on Obama-care and “sex-change” operations.

We understand that liberals don’t want to talk (rationally, anyway) about Obama-care covering abortions and grotesque transsexual “sex-change” procedures as “health care.” That is why we must discuss these awful possibilities. (By the way, even before Barber’s column, below, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s blog noted that President Obama’s favorite think tank, the liberal-left Center for American Progress, was beating the drums for adding “sex change operations to the list of medical procedures that all health insurance policies in the nation must cover.”) — Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.com

BANQUET REMINDER:  Culture warrior and former professional boxer Matt Barber (right) is coming to Chicago on Saturday, Oct. 24 to keynote the AFTAH fundraising banquet. The dinner is being held at the Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL, and tickets are $50 per person. You can prepay online (just note “AFTAH banquet” in the Paypal or Credit Card form) or mail your check (designate it “AFTAH Banquet”) to: Americans For Truth, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. Please spread the word and make plans to come! E-mail aftahangela@gmail.com or americansfortruth@comcast.net for more information.

_____________________________

Matt Barber writes:

Sex-Change-apalooza: ObamaCare Likely to Mandate Free ‘Sex-Change’ Surgeries

By Matt Barber, August 5, 2009

I got a call a couple days ago from a producer with MSNBC. He wanted a hard copy of a press release I sent out entitled: “ObamaCare Likely to Mandate Free ‘Sex-Change’ Surgeries.” In the release I addressed the likelihood that, under Obama’s monolithic socialized healthcare scheme, taxpayers may well end up funding elective and entirely cosmetic “gender reassignment” surgeries. I was happy to oblige and asked which program he produced. “Rachel Maddow,” he reluctantly divulged. I chuckled and joked, “Oh, I’m sure Rachel will give me a glowing review.”

I then suggested that it would be better still if Rachel actually had me on the show to defend and debate the substance of my release. He declined. Understandable, though. Ms. Maddow—a hard-left lesbian activist who plays a pseudo-journalist on TV—certainly wouldn’t want me confusing all 242 of her wide-eyed, spoon-fed, Kool-Aid swilling viewers with the facts. (By the way, Rachel, sweetheart, if you have the guts, the offer still stands.)