Homosexual “conservative” pundit Andrew Sullivan wrote sympathetically aboug “gay” male couples’ ‘understanding of the need for extramarital [sexual] outlets” and suggested such “honesty” and “flexibility” could “undoubtedly help strengthen and inform many heterosexual bonds.”

____________________________

Emphasis in bold is added to all quotations below: 

‘Extramarital Outlets’ and Homosexual ‘Monogamy’

“The mutual nurturing and sexual expressiveness of many lesbian relationships, the solidity and space of many adult gay male relationships, are qualities sometimes lacking in more rote, heterosexual couplings.”
–Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality, p. 202, (1995)

“Some of this is unavailable to the male-female union: there is more likely to be greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman; and again, the lack of children gives gay couples greater freedom. Their failures entail fewer consequences for others. But something of the gay’s relationship’s necessary honesty, its flexibility, and its equality could undoubtedly help strengthen and inform many heterosexual bonds.”
–Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal, pp. 202-03.

Radically Alter an ‘Archaic Institution’

“A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.”
–Michelangelo Signorile, “Bridal Wave,” OUT magazine, December/January 1994, p. 161.

Ending Marriage’s ‘Sexist Trappings’

“[E]nlarging the [marital] concept to embrace same-sex couples would necessarily transform it into something new….Extending the right to marry to gay people — that is, abolishing the traditional gender requirements of marriage — can be one of the means, perhaps the principal one, through which the institution divests itself of the sexist trappings of the past.”
–the late homosexual activist Tom Stoddard, quoted in Roberta Achtenberg, et al, “Approaching 2000: Meeting the Challenges to San Francisco’s Families,” The Final Report of the Mayor’s Task Force on Family Policy, City and County of San Francisco, June 13, 1990, p.1.

Transform the Definition of Family 

“[Legalizing “same-sex marriage”] is also a chance to wholly transform the definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us.”
–Michelangelo Signorile, “I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,” OUT magazine, May 1996, p. 30.

‘Being Queer Means Transforming the Very Fabric of Society’ 

“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. … Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. … As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. …In arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. … We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society’s view of reality.”
–Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?” in William Rubenstein, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405.

New Gay Model: Monogamy Not Essential for Marriage

“Gay life, like black culture, might even provide models and materials for rethinking family life and improving family law. I will now chart some ways in which this might be so — in particular drawing on the distinctive experience and ideals of gay male couples.

“Take sex. Traditionally, a commitment to monogamy — to the extent that it was not simply an adjunct of property law, a vehicle for guaranteeing property rights and succession — was the chief mode of sacrifice imposed upon or adopted by married couples as a means of showing their sacred valuing of their relation. But gay men have realized that while couples may choose to restrict sexual activity in order to show their love for each other, it is not necessary for this purpose; there are many other ways to manifest and ritualize commitment. And so monogamy (it appears) is not an essential component of love and marriage. The authors of “The Male Couple” found that:

[T]he majority of [gay male] couples, and all of the couples together for longer than five years, were not continuously sexually exclusive with each other. Although many had long periods of sexual exclusivity, it was not the ongoing expectation for most. We found that gay men expect mutual emotional dependability with their partners [but also believe] that relationship fidelity transcends concerns about sexuality and exclusivity.

Both because marital sacrifices must be voluntary to be meaningful and because sexual exclusivity is not essential to marital commitment, the law should not impose monogamy on married couples. And indeed, half the states have decriminalized adultery.
–Homosexual academic Richard D. Mohr, The Case for Gay Marriage, 9 NOTRE DAME J.L. ETHICS & PUB. POLICY 215, 233 (1995)

Churches: Homophobic, Antiquated Backwaters

“We can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings in psychology. Against the mighty pull of institutional religion, one must set up the mightier draw of science and public opinion…. Such an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion.”
–Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of Straight America,” homosexual magazine The Guide, November 1987.

Make Anti-Gays Look Nasty

“We intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to disassociate themselves from such types.”
–Marshall K. Kirk and Erastes Pill, “The Overhauling of Straight America,” The Guide (homosexual) magazine, November 1987.

 University of Pennsylvania History Professor Alan Kors defends freedom against the camps Left.

Click this link: http://www.isi.org/lectures/flvplayer/lectureplayer.aspx?file=v000114_cicero_050807.flv, or go to this Intercollegiate Studies Institute web page and chose the video (or audio MP3), “Have Universities Become the Enemy of a Free Society?” The debate is between Alan C. Kors, Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania, and William Galston, Professor, School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland. It occurred at the University of Delaware, Trabant Theater, on May 8, 2007.

Kors is brilliant. Our condolences to Professor Galston. 

I was greatly encouraged by the many letters AFTAH received responding to 14-year-old “Joe,” who wrote via our website explaining that he is a gay atheist who hates Americans For Truth. I will be passing on all the notes to Joe, and publishing a few, including this from suburban Chicago writer Laurie Higgins (emphasis added)–Peter L.:
_________________________________________________________________________
 
Dear Joe,
 
What you have said, what you feel, and what you think break my heart. All reveal the deception that our culture has taught our children. Mr. LaBarbera doesn’t hate you or homosexuals. And even though I firmly believe that homosexual conduct is not moral, I do not hate you either.
 
I no more hate you than I hate those who engage in other behaviors that I consider immoral, and those would include me, my husband, and my children. Every single human who has ever lived, save one, engages in immoral behavior. Our task is figuring out what constitutes moral and immoral behavior. You have appropriated one philosophical perspective on what determines right and wrong: you believe that if a behavior doesn’t directly harm another person physically, then it’s moral. But some of the greatest thinkers who have ever lived define morality differently. Defining morality as you have would permit adult consensual incest, lying, selfishness, polyamory, and apotemnophilia.
 
Neither Mr. LaBarbera nor I believe that homosexuals choose the feelings they have anymore than those who are attracted to adolescents or children or their siblings choose their powerful attractions, or those married men who are attracted to other women choose those attractions, or those who are powerfully drawn toward gambling or alcohol or drugs choose those attractions. We do believe, however, that those who experience same-sex attraction choose how they will respond to their desires, just as I choose how to respond to my selfish, or greedy, or angry, or lustful desires. Some in society tell you that acting on same-sex impulses is legitimate and good. They have lied to you, and it is a cruel lie.
 
You ask why someone would care about the sexual practices of others. I care that others are teaching children lies. I care that others are teaching kids that homosexual conduct is morally equivalent to heterosexual conduct when it’s not. I care because that lie carries devastating emotional, psychological, physical, and spiritual consequences. I care because I care about truth and its impact on the lives of individuals and on society.
 
Joe, homosexuals do have the full complement of civil rights.  They even have marital rights. Every homosexual can get married; they simply can’t redefine marriage. They can’t eliminate the criterion of complementarity, just as those who “love” children cannot eliminate the minimum age criterion, and those who love relatives cannot eliminate the consanguinity requirement, and those who love multiple partners cannot eliminate the binary requirement. The fact that homosexuals cannot redefine the institution does not mean the institution is unavailable to them.
 
As to your comment that homosexuals can think logically: You’re absolutely right, Joe; you were created in the image and likeness of God, and, therefore, you possess the gift of reason. It is not just religious traditions that inform us that homosexual conduct is wrong. Natural law tells us that. You are heterosexual, Joe. All humans are. Species cannot procreate homosexually. Our bodies are not designed for homosexual sex. They are exquisitely designed for heterosex. Desires do not define identity. And the male sex drive is so powerful, it can be misdirected to a whole host of inappropriate objects and activities. Don’t allow the unbidden presence of desires, impulses, or attractions define who you are. None of us should.
 
Please, do not dismiss arguments that emerge from religious tradition. Speaking as one who deeply values logic, evidence, and intellectual argument, I can attest that Christianity holds up intellectually. And remember, atheism too is based on faith. You are no more able to prove the non-existence of God than I am able to prove unequivocally God’s existence. But search out some “apologetics.” I would recommend the website of Ravi Zacharias. And read about the conversions of atheists like Mortimer Adler who was a famous University of Chicago philosopher, or British journalist Malcolm Muggeridge, or more recently the physicist Anthony Flew. And it’s not just the Christian Bible that teaches that homosexuality is wrong; the Old Testament does also, as does the Koran.
 
By the way, there are no scientific studies that prove that homosexuality is genetic. In fact, most scientists, even those who identify as gay and whose studies are most often cited, believe that at most, biology may play a part in desire, but that environmental influences are significant. In addition, the presence of biological influences tells us precisely nothing about morality.
 
Joe, there is freedom, truth, beauty, joy, and peace available to you. Seek them relentlessly, and know this, except for a very few fringe wackos, those who hold traditional beliefs do not hate you. On the contrary, they grieve for the lies you’ve been taught and desire nothing but that which is truly good for you.
 
If you would like to talk more, and your parents are agreeable to us talking, I would love nothing more. You can contact me through AFTAH. 
 
Laurie

NOTE: we have already received many responses to this item that was e-mailed out by AFTAH on New Year’s Eve. We will be posting some of these responses: 

Please read the letter below, which we received Saturday from a 14-year-old atheist boy who hates Americans For Truth.  Nothing makes my heart grieve more than a confused young person rejecting God and embracing an unnatural sexual identity (“gayness”) built around ungodly behavior that up until a few decades ago was viewed as so immoral that it wasn’t even discussed in public.  I don’t know Joe, but I can safely say that his tragic life choice was made easier by the organized homosexual movement.  This is the saddest end result of “gay pride” — corrupting the hearts and minds of young people and helping to put them in grave physical, emotional and spiritual danger:

________________________

The following message was sent from the Americans for Truth Website:
From: Joe [name withheld]  
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2007 10:52 AM
To: americansfortruth@comcast.net
Subject: [AFT Web Site] Homosexuality.
________________________

To put it bluntly, I probably hate you more than anything else in the world. Like many others, I believe you have the moral equivalent of a modern-day KKK: hating people for being different and having opposing beliefs. I am a liberal, gay, atheistic 14 year old boy, and I believe I have more morals than you. You are a disgrace to humanity. I\’m sorry that I am being so childish in my \”argument\” which is turning out like hate mail, but I just cannot put in words how much I disagree with you. Homosexuals should have rights because they are humans, capable of thinking logically and making decisions, just like you and me. And why does what other people do sexually concern you at all? I want you to tell me, from a non-religious standpoint, exactly how homosexuals are hurting you? Because if they are not negatively affecting you in any way (which is what a suspect) then you should have no problem with them. Most of America knows the truth about homosexuality, which is that it is a preference, not a choice, just like a favorite food to put it in simple terms. You like it, because it pleases you, not because you choose to like a certain food. I\’m sorry that this message has stretched so long, and I would like a reply and a rebuttal to my claims. USING LOGIC, not religion. -Joe [————-]
________________________

I have yet to respond to young Joe, but let us all pray for him.  If you would like to send a message to Joe, send it to AFTAH at americansfortruth@comcast.net, and I will pass it on to him.  But I won’t be relaying any notes from our homosexual activist detractors, for it looks like Joe is getting enough bad advice already from the “gay” side. 

I hope and pray that the God whom Joe rejects will intervene in his life to take him off this course that can only lead to destruction: “There is a way that seems right to a man [or in this case, a boy], but in the end it leads to death.” (Proverbs 16:25)  Yes, there is a “culture war,” and a spiritual one, and lives hang in the balance.

Sincerely,

Peter LaBarbera

www.americansfortruth.org

Thank you to all who have stood with Americans For Truth in 2007.  Your generosity keeps us in the battle for Truth!

By Peter LaBarbera 

NOTE TO READERS: When we made our initial comments on our story, we were relying on what turned out to be a sloppy and erroneous Chicago Tribune story (see bottom), and we had not seen the Chicago Sun Times story on this crime, which conflicts with the Tribune account. I apologize for reporting this so quickly and for foolishly relying on a single Chicago media story for accurate news (not a good idea).

Here are the essential details from the Sun-Times article, “Alleged gay advance cited in rape” (emphasis added):

Felipe Rivera, 43, is charged with a hate crime as well as aggravated criminal sexual assault and other offenses, said a spokesman for the Cook County state’s attorney’s office. If convicted, he could face more than 30 years in prison, a source said.

 

According to a spokesman for Cicero police, Rivera and the victim encountered each other at a party Friday night in the 1200 block of South 50th Avenue.

 

“Mr. Rivera got upset apparently because he believed the victim, No. 1, didn’t respond to a female and then, No. 2, somehow winked at him — made what he perceived as a sexual advance,” said Cicero police spokesman Dan Proft.

 

30 years possible
Rivera then punched the victim in the face, Proft said, and was asked to leave the party. He allegedly waited outside for the victim. According to Rivera, the victim, 37, then propositioned Rivera for a sex act — a claim the victim denies, Proft said.

 

Rivera followed the victim to the outer staircase of a basement apartment, where he removed the victim’s pants and raped him, authorities said. Afterward, Rivera punched the victim in the head, leaving him semi-conscious, then inserted a metal broom handle in the victim’s rectum, sources said.

 

Rivera gave police these details in a videotaped statement, according to Proft. When asked why he did it, Rivera allegedly said it was “because he hates f – – – – – s, and this is what they get,” according to Proft.

 

A spokesman for the state’s attorney said Rivera also shouted “sexually oriented derogatory comments” during the rape.

 

After the alleged attack, Rivera went to his mother’s residence nearby. Because she has an order of protection against him, she called the police, Proft said.

I just spoke with Cicero spokesman Dan Proft, who says that the Sun-Times story is the most accurate he’s read.

In our original commentary (below), I relied on the Trib account which appears to have mangled Proft’s statement so as to assert that the violent assailant propositioned his male victim for sex. According to the Sun-Times, however, the assailant claims that his victim did the propositioning (which the victim denies actually happened). 

 Which homosexual activist(s) got AFTAH’s “Gay Grinch” award for 2007? Hint: it involves the Boy Scouts. Listen online to find out.

By Peter LaBarbera 

Click HERE to listen to the first hour, and HERE to listen online to the second hour of my guest-hosting appearance Dec. 17 on WYLL (a Christian station outside Chicago, Ill.) for the Sandy Rios Show. Sandy is a dear friend, president of Culture Campaign, a commentator on FOX News, and — I almost forgot — a Great American.

The show features (in the first hour) some great exchanges with my friends, African Americans Rev. Al Cleveland of Rehoboth Empowerment Christian Church and Charlene Cothran, discussing DiversityInc publisher Luke Visconti’s nutty comparison of me to a 19th Century slavery advocate.

The second hour features: an interview with Dan Zanoza of Republicans For Fair Media on CNN’s “political ambush” using a supposed “gay general” at its YouTube Republican Presidential Debate to promote homosexuality in the military; a short but sweet exchange with AFTAH Board Member Mike Heath of the Christian Civic League of Maine on getting men back involved in the “culture war”: and a short interview with Dave Smith of the Illinois Family Institute on his campaign to get the NFL to stop allowing bawdy ads during football games.

You can also listen at the end for AFTAH’s first annual “Gay Grinch” award for 2007. Hint: it involves the Boy Scouts of America.

There’s one big problem with the broadcast: I don’t think I said “um” enough…. Oh well, practice makes perfect. Thanks to Sandy for the opportunity. — Peter LaBarbera

Charlene Cothran/David Parker AFTAH BANQUET VIDEO Is Finally Available!

Excellent teaching tool for young people who are being brainwashed to accept homosexuality!
 
The AFTAH Banquet Videos are finally available and will be shipped ASAP!  To order a complete DVD (or CD) set of both ex-lesbian Charlene Cothran’s and parental rights hero David Parker’s outstanding talks, make an online donation of at least $25 postpaid to Americans For Truth (http://americansfortruth.com/donate/). Please use the online form at https://americansfortruth.nozonenet.com/donate/cc.php to specify your order.  You can substitute an audio CD but you must request this specifically. To order by regular mail, send your check or money order specifying “2007 Banquet DVD” (or CD) to: Americans For Truth, P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.

Bulk Orders available: 2 for $40; 3 for $55; 4 for $70; add $10 for each additional DVD or contact us at americansfortruth@comcast.net (or 630-717-7631) for large bulk order pricing.

Click HERE to listen online to Concerned Women For America’s recent online interview about DiversityInc publisher Luke Visconti’s nasty slam against AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera, comparing him to a past slavery advocate. Charlene Cothran, an African-American former lesbian who spoke at AFTAH’s banquet, is not too pleased with “white guy” Visconti’s silly analogy.

CWA writes regarding the online broadcast:

DiversityInc. magazine, an influential business and human resources publication, recently hosted a panel discussion on “Religion in the Workplace.” While Peter LaBarbera, founder of Americans for Truth, was originally invited to be the lone representative of traditional Christian views on the panel, he was later dis-invited after homosexual activist panelists refused to participate if he were there. Later, while Peter was allowed to submit a column expressing his views, magazine co-founder Luke Visconti published a rebuttal comparing Peter, and all traditionally-minded Christians with slave owners and the Ku Klux Klan. Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, discusses this situation with Peter LaBarbera and special guest Charlene Cothran, publisher of Venus magazine, an African-American and a former lesbian.

You can access all CWA’s online multi-media presentations HERE.