Excerpted from Sutton: Nothing Wrong With Sharing Bed With Page, by Chet Brokaw, published Jan 25, 2007, by Yankton Daily:

A state senator accused of sexually groping a male legislative page last February testified Wednesday night that he saw nothing wrong with sharing a motel bed with the lad.

Dan Sutton, D-Flandreau, is the subject of a special state Senate inquiry into an allegation that he fondled Austin Wiese, 19, now a college student.

“I didn’t do what Austin is claiming that I did,” Sutton told a lawyer hired by the Senate to grill him…

Asked whether he thought it was appropriate to climb into bed with his legislative page, Sutton responded that Wiese “was like a nephew or a son to me and my wife. I had no concern.”…

Asked directly Wednesday if he groped Wiese, Sutton responded several times: “I didn’t do anything.”

Sutton, who is in the insurance business, said he was shocked when Wiese called him on the phone and made the allegation.

“I was stunned in disbelief,” Sutton said. “All that was going through my mind was … my wife, my family, my career.”

Continue reading at Yankton Press…

By Peter LaBarbera

One of the fascinating aspects of the Canadian and European stories on pro-homosexuality “hate speech” enforcement is the mainstream nature of the speech now being censored. In Canada, a politician is fined for saying homosexuality is not natural or normal. Wow. Shocking, hateful stuff.

Now in France, a Member of Parliament (below) is fined for saying that heterosexuality is superior to homosexuality. Horrors. Jail this menace to society!

Two observations: 1) I sure am glad to be living in the good ol’ USA, where we have a First Amendment. When the American “Gay” Left tires of simply twisting the motives of pro-family advocates (e.g., comparing us to Nazis and calling Christians the “American Taliban,” as is the habit of lesbian blogger and prodigious name-caller Pam Spaulding), they will grow jealous of “hate speech” prosecutions abroad and start ratcheting up calls to ban “homophobic” speech here. Mark my words.

When that happens, the “gay” cause will lose considerable support from moderates and liberty-loving Americans who despise censorship. If it doesn’t, America as a free nation will be no longer. The good sign is that already, people are tiring of the creeping pro-“gay” Big Brotherism in corporations and the culture, dictating what can and cannot be said (e.g., “spouse”: bad; “partner”: good).

2) Where is the outcry among the American “gay” opinion-molders on the punishment abroad of Judeo-Christian “anti-gay” speech? Where is the angst over the erosion of freedom of speech in the once-“free” West? Why aren’t more homosexual leaders and writers swearing off such tyranny here, perhaps recognizing that the censors might turn on them some day?

One thing is clear: our noble cause of stopping the creation and proliferation of laws granting “rights” based on homosexuality (“sexual orientation”) is as much a freedom issue as it is a moral one.

——————————

The following is excerpted from French MP Fined for Using Homophobic Language, published Jan 25, 2007, by Independent (South Africa):

A court fined a conservative member of the French parliament €3 000 (about R28 000) on Thursday for abusive comments about homosexuals, the first time a politician had been prosecuted under a two-year-old law banning homophobic language.

Christian Vanneste, a member of the ruling UMP party, was quoted in the media as saying homosexuality was “inferior” to heterosexuality and would be “dangerous for humanity if it was pushed to the limit”.

The court also ordered him to pay €2 000 in damages and costs to three gay and lesbian groups who brought the case.

Gay and civil rights groups welcomed the ruling, saying in a statement it “aimed to punish homophobic comments which should be fought because they inspire and legitimise verbal and physical attacks”.

Continue reading in Independent…

According to French Politician Fined Under Gay Hate Law, published Jan 25, 2007, by the pro-homosexuality 365Gay:

…The maximum Vanneste faced was imprisonment…

Following the Douai court ruling gay activists who leveled the charge said in a statement they will continue to charge politicians who target gays, adding that hate speech inspires and legitimizes verbal and physical attacks.

Continue reading at 365Gay…

Ex-“gay” Christian activist James Hartline is drawing attention to a disconcerting announcement from San Diego LGBT Pride:

San Diego Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Pride has established a first-ever, paid internship position for a high school senior as part of its resolution to further involve LGBT youth into the long-term planning of Pride’s annual celebrations.

The position, which partly involves direct outreach into the youth community, sponsorship involvement and volunteer training, begins in January and runs until the end of August with the possibility of an extension…

“The voice of teenage youth is an integral part of the everyday planning process for our annual events,” said Ron deHarte, executive director of San Diego LGBT Pride. “The internship program is yet another growth step of the organization.”

We at Americans For Truth share Hartline’s concern and implore San Diego residents to speak out against the involvement of teenagers in planning and organizing an event which celebrates sexual perversion — especially given the track record of this particular “festival”:

In 2005, San Diego Gay Pride employed five registered sex offenders in voluntary and supervisory positions. One of those employees, Marty the Clown, a convicted pedophile, was hired to work in the San Diego Gay Pride Children’s Garden!

In 2006, San Diego Gay Pride continued its dangerous campaign against the young kids of San Diego by allowing children to march in its parade with porn-promoters, male prostitutes and nearly-nude male strippers.

No responsible adult who knows the reality of homosexual celebrations like “gay pride” parades would countenance placing teenagers or even younger children in that environment. And that’s just the point: many “gay” activists (and their straight liberal allies) are so committed to pushing for acceptance of homosexuality that they are not responsible enough to protect children. Parents, beware.

Some homosexuals would agree with Hartline, but many activists are so far removed from traditional morality and desensitized to the debauchery that surrounds “gay” celebrations that they’ve lost all perspective on how perverted the events are. One of the saddest spectacles I have observed over and over at “gay pride” parades are the young, impressionable children brought to view or even march in the parades as if they were being put on by Macy’s.

These are celebrations of homosexuality, for goodness sake! Isn’t it bad enough that adults are involved? In the name of “rights” and “equality,” a sin lobby corrupts children. — Peter LaBarbera

This story illustrates the disturbing neo-reality toward which our nation is advancing as we embrace various homosexual “rights.” It will not work both ways: If homosexual adoption is “good,” adoption by faithful Christians (who oppose homosexuality) will be viewed as “evil” and will ultimately be disallowed. If so-called “homophobic hate speech” is outlawed, Christians will necessarily forfeit freedom of speech and will be persecuted for preaching repentance from homosexuality. Law cannot be morally neutral. — Sonja Dalton

——————————-

Excerpted from Adopt? We Were ‘Too Idealistic’, published Jan 25, 2007, by Telegraph (UK):

…My husband and I are a typical, professional couple who left it too late to have children. We married in 1992, when I was in my late thirties. A few years later, I miscarried. In 2000, when we were in our mid-forties, we decided that we wanted to adopt.

We contacted various adoption agencies: all of them had a waiting list of about 18 months…

We were asked a lot of intrusive questions about our family backgrounds. This was understandable and we were happy to comply. James and I are both only children from happy family backgrounds, with parents who stayed together to the end of their lives. Although we first met in our twenties, we had split up. In the time apart, we had both become practising Christians…

We got the distinct impression that they had a real problem with our Christian faith, although our home is not overtly religious and neither are we. Would we want a child placed with us to accompany us to church? Would we put pressure on a child who didn’t want to go? We said that it wouldn’t be a problem because, if a child didn’t want to go to church, one of us would stay at home. We do not believe that you can ram Christianity down anyone’s throat; a child has to make up his or her own mind.

We were quite open in our belief that a child needs a male and a female role model. I said that a girl finds it easier to talk to another woman about periods and sex, for example, while a boy finds it easier to talk to his father.

The social workers were keen to know how we would react if a child announced that he or she was gay. We said that we believe that the same ground rules apply whether you are gay or heterosexual: that sex before marriage is wrong. We don’t believe in same-sex marriages but, if a child told us he or she was gay, we would still love that child, even if we didn’t agree with the lifestyle they chose…

At the end of the home assessment, the report concluded that we had too idealistic a view of family life and marriage and that this might prejudice a homosexual child: a gay child would see the way we live and feel that we wouldn’t be able to support him or her in their lifestyle. Why is it there isn’t the same concern about placing a heterosexual child with a homosexual couple who might not be able to support a heterosexual child?

Our home assessment report was put before the adoption panel and we were asked to explain our views. We did so, saying that they were based on our Christian faith. We later received a letter saying that we had been turned down as adoptive parents, that we were not suitable for any of the children they had to place and that we would have to reconsider our views on homosexuality…

If you start compromising your faith, you might as well throw it out. We have written to the British Agencies for Adoption and Fostering to ask for it to be included in their guidelines that candidates are not asked questions that compromise their faith.

Continue reading in Telegraph…

Our good friend Matt Barber (pictured right) — former Corporate Outreach Director of AFTAH and now Policy Director of Cultural Issues at Concerned Women for America — issued the following response to the sad story below:

A 14-year-old German boy has decided to undergo a sex change, making him the youngest patient in history to receive this extreme procedure. The young boy Tim, who prefers to be called “Kim,” has wanted gender reassignment surgery since he was 12 and claims to have considered himself female since age two. Concerned Women for America (CWA) is saddened that doctors and parents have fostered this young boy’s gender confusion and are allowing him to go forward with the surgery.

“This poor kid’s situation really undercuts the homosexual lobby’s deceptive equality-fluff and hyperbole,” said Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues. “It casts a bright light on the truly destructive, bleak and evil nature of the homosexual agenda. Has our world completely lost all sanity? That parents would allow their child to be treated like this is mind-boggling.

“Rather than addressing the emotional or chemical problems responsible for Tim’s gender confusion, his parents and doctors have bought into the homosexual lobby’s PC puffery hook, line and sinker. They’re about to rob him of his ability to father a child, and render him horribly disfigured and further confused. It’s not just a tragedy. It’s a travesty.”

——————————

The following is excerpted from Unhappy As a Boy, Kim Became Youngest Ever Transsexual at 12, by Bojan Pancevski, published Jan 29, 2007 by Telegraph (UK):

A boy of 12 is believed to have become the world’s youngest sex change patient after convincing doctors that he wanted to live the rest of his life as a female.

The boy – originally called Tim, but now known as Kim – has started to receive hormone treatment, in preparation for the operation that will eventually complete the sex change.

Tim was diagnosed as a transsexual two years ago, when doctors and psychiatrists concluded that his claims to be “in the wrong body” were so deeply felt that he required treatment. The therapy involves artificially arresting male puberty, with a series of potent hormone injections before the administration of female hormones to initiate the development of features such as breasts.

…Kim reacted badly to the first signs of puberty, he said. “At that stage we realised that she was terrified of growing facial hair and her voice breaking.”

Kim’s parents consulted psychiatrists across Germany. Some condemned their support of their child’s desire to undergo a sex change, or suggested that Kim be kept under observation in a closed psychiatric ward. But others agreed that the child should receive therapy, because growing up to be a man would have damaged her personality.

Dr Bern Meyenburg, the head of a clinic for children and adolescents with identity disturbances at Frankfurt University, concluded that the child was serious. He wrote in his diagnosis: “Kim is a mentally well-developed child who appears happy and balanced. There is no doubt of the determined wish, that was already detectable since early childhood. It would have been very wrong to let Kim grow up to be a man. It is rare to have such a clear-cut case.”

…Should Kim change her mind before the surgery, the procedure could be reversed. [Note from AFTAH: Let us pray for this child to change his mind and stop this procedure before it is too late!] Doctors admit that the treatment involves a risk, however, and that its effects on children as young as Kim are not fully understood.

For legal reasons, the final stage – cosmetic surgery to remove the male genitalia – cannot take place until Kim is 18. Britain’s youngest transsexual is Angel Paris-Jordan, who was granted an operation on the NHS at the age of 17.

Continue reading at Telegraph…

Excerpted from Moscow Mayor Calls Gay Pride Parade Satanic, published Jan 29, 2007, by MosNews:

Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov said Monday he would never allow a gay parade to take place in Moscow despite pressure from the West, Russia’s RIA-Novosti news agency reports.

“Last year, Moscow came under unprecedented pressure to sanction the gay parade, which can be described in no other way than as Satanic,” Luzhkov said at the 15th Christmas educational readings in the Kremlin Palace.

“We did not let the parade take place then, and we are not going to allow it in the future,” said Luzhkov who has been in office since 1992.

…Luzhkov thanked the attending head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II, for his support at a time when, he said, the West is exerting considerable pressure on Moscow authorities and trying to promote gay relationships under the cover of creativity and freedom of expression.

“Religious thinkers throughout the world have said that the West has reached a crisis of faith. Some European nations bless single-sex marriages and introduce sexual guides in schools,” Luzhkov said. “Such things are a deadly moral poison for children.”

Continue reading at MosNews…

Homosexual Activist Files Deceptive Practices Complaint against Ex-Gay Video 1/25/2007

Homosexual activist Wayne Besen has filed a complaint with the Illinois Attorney General’s office over an Illinois ministry promoting the video “It’s Not Gay.” Besen claims that the video, which features interviews with those who have come out of homosexuality, is deceptive. A similar charged has been filed against the American Family Association and others who promote or sell the video. Martha Kleder spoke with Matt Barber, CWA’s policy director for cultural issues and Pete LaBarbera, founder and president of Americas for Truth, the ministry targeted by Besen. Listen Online | Download

A quote from GLSEN’s founder and executive director Kevin Jennings — the same GLSEN which designated this week (Jan 22-26, 2007) as No Name Calling Week, an opportunity for homosexual activists to influence your children.

TAKE ACTION — Make your school administrators aware of the origins of No Name Calling Week and of Kevin Jennings’ comments which reveal his character and (in)sincerity about tolerance/diversity…and then demand that GLSEN be refused access to students in your community.

Excerpted from When Silence Would Have Been Golden, by Peter LaBarbera, published April 10, 2006, by Concerned Women for America:

GLSEN’S JENNINGS: !&%#! THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT!
Addressing a church audience on March 20, 2000 in New York City — just days before “Fistgate” — GLSEN Executive Director Kevin Jennings offered a stinging (and quite intolerant) assessment of how to deal with religious conservatives:

Twenty percent of people are hard-core fair-minded [pro-homosexual] people. Twenty percent are hard-core [anti-homosexual] bigots. We need to ignore the hard-core bigots, get more of the hard-core fair-minded people to speak up, and we’ll pull that 60 percent [of people in the middle] … over to our side. That’s really what I think our strategy has to be. We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. We also have to quit — … I’m trying to find a way to say this. I’m trying not to say, ‘[F—] ’em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think! [audience laughter] Drop dead!⁹

It should be noted that GLSEN and Jennings make heavy use of the words “respect” and “tolerance” in their public rhetoric and in descriptions of their programs.¹⁰

Continue reading at CWA…