Homosexual lobby’s report features dark graphic caricature of AFTAH’s LaBarbera

HUMAN SMEAR CAMPAIGN: Who is that shadowy figure? A mafia don? An ISIS terrorist? A drug kingpin? No, it’s AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera, as caricatured by the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign in their new report, “The Export of Hate.” See pages 9-10 of the report for the section on LaBarbera and AFTAH.

Special Note to AFTAH Readers from Peter LaBarbera:

Folks, the notion of what constitutes “hate” has become highly politicized. We will have more on the Human Rights Campaign’s deceitful and comically over-the-top report, “The Export of Hate,” which prominently features yours truly–complete with an ominous-looking, blackened graphic of my face designed to cast me as a shadowy figure–in upcoming posts. [Graphic of AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera shown at right; see pages 9-10 for the section on me.]

Take a look at that photo–yes, that’s me, according to the malicious activists at HRC, who apparently must exaggerate and contort their opposition to fit it into their jaundiced redefinition of “hate.” Anyone who knows me wouldn’t recognize me from that graphic–and while I’m a lot of things, a sinister hatemonger isn’t one of them. I am generally an upbeat, affable guy. I love God and I love people, and I want them to come to the knowledge of my Savior, Jesus Christ, so they can find forgiveness and draw close to God.

Please note that in the post-Floyd Corkins world (Corkins was thwarted in a potentially murderous attack on Family Research Council), the ongoing effort to paint pro-family advocates like me as horrible haters on a par with the KKK could incite a violent and even deadly attack against us by a homosexual zealot.

For the record, I enthusiastically stand behind my quotation–on the Alan Colmes Show Jan. 7 of this year–provided by the report as evidence of my supposed “hate.” Colmes had pressed me on whether children were better off in single-parent households or homosexual-led households, to which I responded (this is the excerpt taken from the HRC report):

“Kids would ‘be better off in a single-parent household…because you’re not modeling homosexual behavior. When you have two men raising a young child, that child grows up learning, basically, dysfunction and a sexual perversion as normality.'”

If criticizing intentionally motherless and intentionally fatherless homosexual-led households is hateful, then surely most of the world is hateful! The LGBT Lobby’s campaign to portray the fervent defense of historic, Judeo-Christian teachings on sex and marriage as Hate, Bigotry & Homophobia–Big Gay Inc’s top three slanders against people of faith and morals–is itself profoundly hateful and bigoted. But we should expect such calculated smears from a Sin Movement that is essentially engaged in a political and cultural war against Nature and Nature’s God. Casting aside the lies and slanders, we will not be deterred in our defense of Truth. God bless. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

Here’s our friend and upcoming banquet speaker Michael Brown’s excellent piece on the HRC report:

_________________________________

The HRC Is Inciting Fear and Hate

By Michael Brown

This essay first appeared in Charisma’s “In the Line of Fire” column. To sign up for Charisma array of e-publications, go HERE.

___________________

The pictures are dark and ominous, the charges chilling: “There exists a network of extremists … [who] spew venomous rhetoric, outrageous theories, and discredited science.”

Just who are these evil people, and what are they doing?

According to the Human Rights Campaign, the world’s largest gay-activist organization, this “network” consists of American, conservative Christian leaders “who are working tirelessly to undercut LGBT people around the world at every turn.”

Perverse event in world’s “gay-est” city features “daddy-boy” master-slaves, human “puppies,” “Naked Twister” and lots of bared body parts

WARNING: Rear nudity, offensive photos and graphic descriptions; as always, AFTAH will block frontal nudity but we will publish photos with rear nudity. Our goal is to convey the “gay” Mecca’s radicalism and perverseness as realistically as possible without being pornographic.

“They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy.” (Romans 1: 29-31; NIV)

 

SAN FRANCISCO, POST-“NUDITY BAN”: San Francisco adopted a “public nudity” ban in 2012. However, it exempted annual nudist events and homosexual-oriented street fairs like the “Up Your Alley” held in the city Sunday. The event drew thousands and featured hundreds upon hundreds of men (and some women) in various states of undress, including full frontal nudity. “Up Your Alley” also promoted condom-less “barebacking” sodomy (condemned by the CDC) despite the presence of AIDS groups; and celebrated human degradation (“slaves”); and consensual violence, e.g., whipping people to the point of bleeding as an S&M ritual (see photos below). All Photos: Americans For Truth, Peter LaBarbera. Fair use allowed as long as “AFTAH.org” is credited. Click on photos to enlarge or view in a separate window.

_________________________________

By Peter LaBarbera; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

SAN FRANCISCO, California– Dear AFTAH Readers:

I was curious to see what out-and-proud San Francisco was like AFTER the city council passed its 2012 “public nudity ban”–which, curiously enough, exempts massive street fairs celebrating nudity and perversion. (This is San Francisco, after all.) So I ventured out to the world’s most sexually deviant city last weekend (Sunday, July 27) to cover its annual “Up Your Alley” street fair, also called “Dore Alley“–put on by the same proud perverts (er…sadomasochistic “leathermen”) that annually stage the notorious Folsom Street Fair.

Organizers of the “Up Your Ally” fair call it “Folsom’s Dirty Little Brother,” which, considering Folsom’s unbridled debauchery, is quite a recommendation for boundary-defying libertines and tourist gawkers who are there for the freak show. [See previous AFTAH stories on Folsom HERE (2007); HERE (2008) and HERE (2009).]

Below is the first installment of a several-part photo-story on the twisted event and the bizarre ethos of San Francisco; the next installment will document the fair’s promotion of “barebacking” (anal sex without a condom)–thus violating the CDC’s longtime, basic recommendation for HIV prevention to “men who have sex with men”: always use a condom. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

P.S. How ironic that the path of “Sexual Liberation” ended up at “Bondage and Discipline”…

THIS BOY IS NOT PLAYING HOCKEY: Perhaps the spikes on his face mask give it away. Grown man poses with his boy love “slave” for a photo at Up Your Alley Fair in San Francisco. The young man had a little white “tail” protruding from his shorts in the back. I witnessed dozens of “masters” walking around with their “slaves” attached to a leash (like a dog). And I also saw more than a few “Master/Slave couples” in which the master was much older than his boy slave(s). There were also heterosexual “Master/Slave” duos at Up Your Alley.

As the Bible says, “they invent ways of doing evil” (Ephesians 1:30). Here is one of the BDSM women at the street fair: 

PENIS ENVY? This is a woman with a strap-on “dildo” (fake penis). It is attached to her groin area with a harness. She was seen earlier in a groping situation with a man. Sexual and gender confusion reign in San Francisco. It should be noted here, strange and comical as it may seem, that some lesbians use dildos to simulate heterosexual sex and/or anal sodomy. There are many attempts to imitate heterosexuality (i.e., normalcy)–some cruder than others–in the LGBT world. 

New government data show homosexuality is far less common than most LGBT activists claimed for decades, and a fraction of what most Americans believe

A Convenient Lie: Homosexual activist Kevin Jennings is just one of many homosexual activists who used the “10 Percent” myth, rooted in Alfred Kinsey’s discredited research, to greatly exaggerate the number of homosexuals in America. Jennings’ book would be far less compelling if it were titled, “One Teacher in 45,” to better represent the actual number of homosexuals and bisexuals in society.

Part One

By Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH Special Report

The first-ever major U.S. Government survey to present “nationally representative data on sexual orientation” finds that only 1.6 percent of Americans identify as “gay” or “lesbian,” while .7 percent identify as “bisexual.” This is about considerably less than the much-ballyhooed, decades-old LGBT claim that 10 percent of society is “gay.”

Almost 98 percent of the 35,557 survey respondents identified themselves as “straight” or “not gay,” according to the survey by the federal National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). It also found significant health and behavior disparities between heterosexuals and self-described gays, lesbians and bisexuals. For example, the latter were much more likely to be heavy drinkers than straights.

So much for ‘10 percent’

The 2.3 percent gay-lesbian-bisexual figure is far below the “10 percent gay” number that has been advanced for decades by homosexual activists and their allies—dating back to the discredited sex research of Alfred Kinsey, who vastly over-sampled sexual adventurers and deviants (including criminals). The “10 Percent” ploy suggested homosexuality was far more common—and hence “normal”–than it actually was. Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, homosexual authors of the influential 1989 book After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in 90s (and relying on Kinsey’s fraudulent estimates), demonstrate how the myth was used for PR purposes:

If we must…pick a specific percentage for propaganda purposes, we may as well stick with the solidly conservative figure suggested by Kinsey decades ago: taking men and women together, at least 10% of the populace has demonstrated its homosexual proclivities so extensively that the proportion may reasonably be called ‘gay.’….

Straights do not appreciate that, with at least one-tenth of the public extensively involved in it, the practice of homosexuality may be a more commonplace activity in America than, say, bowling (6%), jogging (7%), golfing (5%), hunting (6%), reading drugstore romance novels (9%), or ballroom dancing (2%) on a regular basis. (Ballroom dancing—not that’s abnormal.)…

You should grasp clearly why America’s persistent underestimation of the number of homosexuals in its citizenry and core institutions is so dangerous to the cause of civil rights….Literally, the more the better. As Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin explain dryly in their classic study, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male

“To those who believe, as children do, that conformance should be universal, any departure from the rule becomes immorality. The immorality seems particularly gross to an individual who is unaware of the frequency with which exceptions to the supposed rule actually occur.”

Thus, when it comes to fighting the charge that homosexuality is statistically abnormal hence immoral, there is strength in numbers. [pp. 16-17, emphasis theirs]

Here I call it a myth, but the defiance with which homosexual activists like Kirk and Madsen so aggressively promulgated their “10 percent gay” factoid suggests that it could more aptly be called a lie, perhaps a useful political lie—which is to say, propaganda. (Another LGBT activist distortion is the oft-repeated claim that homosexuals, and now transgenders, are “born that way” despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.)

For example, Kevin Jennings, the founder of GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, and a former Obama Department of Education appointee, titled one of his books, “One Teacher in Ten” (see graphic above)—which is far more compelling, from a “gay” activist perspective, than “One Teacher in 45.”

WARNING: contains photo with male rear nudity; graphic acts described

Manhood Crisis: The leftist “Right Wing Watch”–a project of People For the American Way–did not like AFTAH president Peter LaBarbera’s criticism of “leather” male homosexuality as “faux masculity.” LaBarbera’s comments were focused on pseudo-macho “leathermen,” but all of male homosexuality revolves around a crisis of manhood. See RWW’s short video below and also the longer interview with David Ortiz from which it was excerpted.

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, one of many “elephants in the room” of politically incorrect topics that most people dare not discuss in debating homosexuality is that–for self-described “gay” men–homosexuality is a masculinity crisis. The bottom line, confirmed tragically by nature and the design of our bodies, is that men were never intended by their Creator to have “sex” with other men–and certainly not with adolescent boys, a common practice of male homosexuality throughout history. The converse is also true: lesbianism is a femininity crisis, although there are some key differences between male and female homosexualities.

When we as common-sense, God-respecting conservatives bring out basic points like this, it enrages our “progressive” foes. How dare we publicly violate the tenets of their core, deviant orthodoxy–that LGBT practice and ideology are not to be questioned, at least by outsiders. Thus it was to be expected that Right Wing Watch–a mischievous arm of People For the American Way (PFAW), the leftist outfit founded by Norman Lear–would not like my recent interview with YouTube host David Ortiz.

Is this real “masculinity”? Contestants at the annual “International Mr. Leather” contest in Chicago Labor Day weekend 2014 line up with rear ends bared for the judges. The sadomasochistic male “leather” movement features pseudo-“macho” homosexuals who engage in rough sex, including, for some, heinous perversions such as “fisting” and “pig sex” orgies. Certainly, despite their play-acting at toughness, this is the ultimate perversion of true, godly masculinity.  Men were never intended by their Creator to have “sex” with other men. In fact, the Bible says such sins are “detestable” in God’s sight. Photo: IML website.

Below is the short excerpt of my June 2 Skype interview with Ortiz, a portion of which was posted by Right Wing Watch, followed by the actual interview divided into three parts. Ortiz started the discussion by declaring, “You cannot be a masculine nation and support homosexuality, in my opinion.” From there I brought up the pitiable homosexual “leathermen,” with their “overkill” attempt at being “macho men”–even as they engage in the most degrading (and unmanly) sexual perversions known to the human race–not the least of which is male-to-male anal sodomy.

I brought up with David Ortiz the uber-debauched “International Mr. Leather” (IML) spectacle held every Memorial Day weekend in Chicago, and hosted by a major hotel–this year the Marriott Hotel on Magnificent Mile. Once again, purveyors of leather-sex hawked their deviant wares and twisted pornography at IML, as the nights were filled with homosexual orgies so vile that it is difficult for the Average Joe to imagine such evil. (Then the poor hotel staff have to disinfect the rooms afterward.)

What is fascinating about left-wing “tolerance/diversity” ideology is that it invariably leads to the acceptance and lack of questioning of even the most extreme–and obviously dysfunctional–subcultures of whatever “protected category” is in question, in this case, the LGBTQ movement. As AFTAH has shown and will continue to show, there is nothing more bizarre, and wrong, than the homosexual BDSM (bondage & discipline, dominance & submission, sadism & masochism) world, which is now drawing plenty of “kinky” heterosexuals as well.

Pro-life leader Joe Scheidler

Folks, I’ve taken the extraordinary step of asking some pro-life and pro-family leaders and friends to vouch for me in the face of a leftist attempt to dislodge me as a speaker at the upcoming Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association event April 11-12. [See AFTAH story HERE.] The following note is from Joe Scheidler, one of my personal heroes and the founder of the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League. Scheidler’s “Truth Tours” featuring placards with photos of unborn babies victimized by what the liberals call “choice” have educated countless tens of thousands of people across America as to the murderous reality of abortion-on-demand.

Thanks to Joe and all the wonderful leaders and advocates who have come to my defense regarding the Canada trip. The Left is whipping up hysteria in Weyburn, Saskatchewan, and sadly more than a few pro-lifers are confused about the false charge of “hate” leveled against me. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

_________________

Joe Scheider writes:

I called the Saskatchewan Pro-Life Assn. and told Loraine what a great guy Peter is and that we have worked with him over the years and that being picketed by a bunch of homosexuals will bring publicity to his talk and to get word to the people in charge to greet him with open arms.  She said she’d pass on my message of support. They have been getting lots of calls, letters, e-mails, etc. Best.-Joe

Yours for Life,

Joseph M. Scheidler
National Director
Pro-Life Action League
Phone: (773) 777-2900
Website: http://prolifeaction.org
Facebook: http://facebook.com/prolifeaction

Another scalp for Big Gay Inc. means diminishing freedom of conscience for Americans

Ideology over Performance: Brendan Eich is extremely qualified to be Mozilla”s CEO. He just thinks the wrong way about the preservation of natural marriage–according to LGBT militants–igniting a homosexual activist campaign against him.

By Peter LaBarbera

In the type of story that has become all too common, the Los Angeles Times reports: “Just days after taking the job, Brendan Eich has resigned as chief executive of Mozilla, the maker of Firefox, after coming under fire for his 2008 support of Proposition 8, the California constitutional amendment that disallowed the marriage of same-sex couples in the state.” That prompted this comment by a smart reader (“brdcstr”):

So Mozilla promotes a lifelong employee based upon his skills and leadership qualities, presumably after an exhaustive search, only to fire him a week into his tenure based upon a donation he made to a cause they differed on?

What are they running over there, a business or a social club? Sounds like the type of company that only welcomes monolithic thinking.

I would be willing to bet that the cackling hyena who asked for his resignation voted for Obama in 2008… When he was opposed to gay marriage, before he was for it.

Gotta a love the liberals who falsely pride themselves as being tolerant, as long as you agree with them. If not, they would prefer to silence your voice instead of engage in debate to promote dialogue and better understanding.

Time to go uninstall my Firefox browser. Like the company, it keeps crashing, rendering it useless.

I’m afraid that my friend Matt Barber, founder of Barbwire.com and an AFTAH Board Member, is correct [see his piece below]: the rising tide of ‘homo-fascist’ bigotry–or call it ‘homo-Marxist’ cultural aggression if you choose–threatens to destroy freedom in this great nation. Note that it is no longer just disagreeing publicly with homosexuality that triggers the powerful forces of Homosexual Indignation and Hate, but merely standing up for natural marriage (one man, one woman), as EX-Mozilla CEO Eich did in supporting California’s Prop 8 in 2008.

Eich, who gave $1,000 to help pass Prop 8, was joined by over seven million “homophobic bigots” in 2008–if you believe pro-homosexual fanatics. Prop 8 passed by a margin of 52.24-47.76 percent, with a popular vote of 7,001,084 in favor and 6,401,482 against.

A troubling pattern of homosexual activist intimidation, corporate or individual capitulation, and then self-censorship or mandated ideological compliance seems to be the West’s New Normal–in defense of the abnormal.

Mozilla’s politically correct baloney

Reading Mozilla’s Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker’s statement on Eich’s resignation reminds me of the old Soviet propaganda: savvy citizens have to read through the obfuscatory lines (a fancy way of saying B.S.) to decipher the real meaning behind the DiversitySpeak. For example, there’s this:

 Apply the “Sexual Sin Substitution” Test for Moral Clarity

OVERCOMING HOMOSEXUALITY: Dan Hitz (left) went from being a homosexual “terrified of true intimacy with a woman” — having grown up in a chaotic and dysfunctional home — to a family man with a wife and five children. Read his Christian testimony HERE and support the new ex-“gay” umbrella group, Restored Hope Network.

Part One (1-5)

By Peter LaBarbera

1) Decide Whether You are with God or Against Him … on the issue of homosexualism (out-and-proud homosexuality as a “civil right”) and sexual sin in general. These days there is no shortage of Secular- and Religious Left activists — and even self-professed “evangelical Christian” sellouts like apostate Jay Bakker — who will tell you that the Bible is ambiguous on homosexuality or even pro-homosexual. Nevertheless, the Word of God is crystal clear on this subject (see Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, for starters). No faithful Christian can make a “biblical” case for accepting homosexual behavior. Thankfully, Jesus Christ has helped many men [e.g., Dan Hitz] and women [e.g., Anne Paulk] overcome homosexual attractions (see Point 4 below). Two great websites refuting “gay Christianity” are Prof. Robert Gagnon’s at www.RobGagnon.net and (former homosexual) DL Foster’s “Gay Christian Movement Watch” at http://www.gcmwatch.com.

2) Apply the “Sexual Sin Substitution Test” (S³T): if you wonder what the proper Christian approach is to any homosexual-related question, simply plug in another egregious sexual sin – incest, pornography use, adultery – for homosexuality and gay and then see if it makes any sense. The theological basis for this test is Leviticus 18, where God (through Moses) lops all the serious sexual sins (including bestiality) in together. (Is God “hateful” for making this association, or does He rather “hate” sins like homosexuality and incest that rebel against nature and its Creator?) Also, don’t fall for the snarky “gay” spin that seeks to dismiss Leviticus by equating its condemnation of sexual sins with the book’s list of ceremonial and dietary laws for Jews. As former homosexual Joe Dallas writes in his book, A Strong Delusion: Confronting the “Gay Christian” Movement (p. 178):

A commonsense approach to the Bible shows that certain ceremonial and dietary laws in the Old Testament…aren’t necessary to follow today. Christians are not, thankfully, under the Mosaic law (Galatians 3: 17-25). But the biblical commandments against homosexual conduct do not appear in the same sections as the dietary and ceremonial laws; in Leviticus…they appear alongside other sexual sins forbidden in both the Old and New Testaments (Lev. 18:22; 20:13).

Applying the S³T approach will give you renewed moral clarity — for example: why is nobody ever accused of being an “incest-phobe” or suffering from “adultery-phobia”? Should President Obama issue a “Porn-Users Pride Proclamation” every June to match his annual “Gay Pride Month” proclamation? Should schools allow “porn-using student clubs”? (There are thousands of “gay”-affirming student clubs in public and private schools across the United States.) What about legalizing incestuous “marriages”? Or celebrating at bawdy Lusters’ Pride Parades in major cities every June? Clearly, homosexuality is the “special sin” that is indulged in our morally degraded society because it has been so well-marketed, to the point where it is now widely treated as an innocuous identity and “civil right.”

From de-criminalization of the “great moral evil” of homosexuality to a “powerful, clamouring, threatening, vengeful” Homosexual Lobby

“Thus we began by attempting to right what was felt an ancient injustice and we ended up with a monster in our midst, powerful and clamouring, flexing its muscles, threatening, vengeful and vindictive towards anyone who challenges its outrageous claims, and bent on making fundamental – and to most of us horrifying – changes to civilised patterns of sexual behavior.” – British historian Paul Johnson, The Quest for God

Corrupting Children: As opposed to jaded Americans, Jamaicans are still shocked by the radical homosexual agenda — including pro-homosexual “children’s” picture books like the above, “King & King,” about a “gay” prince who “marries” another prince rather than a princess. Historian Paul Johnson describes how what began in the U.K. in the name of “compassion” for homosexuals (rescinding anti-sodomy laws) morphed into a vengeful “monster in our midst” — the powerful Homosexual Lobby. Today’s homosexual activists will even corrupt the minds and souls of the very young in their desperate quest to rationalize their sinful behavior, which God condemns.

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, when I was in Jamaica I took time in my presentations to share this compelling passage from British historian Paul Johnson, from his book, The Quest for God: A Personal Pilgrimage. (Hat tip to Paul Cameron of Family Research Institute for bringing this to light.) I have found nothing that better explains the inevitable slippery slope of indulged pro-homosexual activism — from the repeal of anti-sodomy laws (motivated by well-intended but misguided compassion toward homosexuals as “victims”); to demands for “tolerance” of homosexuality; to the steady growth of a “gay rights” movement winning passage of laws granting affirmative “rights” based on sexual perversion (and gender confusion); to homosexual and transgender advocacy in schools (targeting even the very young [see book photo]); and ultimately, to the rise of a powerful, well-heeled Homosexual/Transgender Lobby that achieves dominance in society at the expense of biblical truth, religious tradition, public health and the rights of others to disagree.

Note that Johnson correctly calls homosexuality a “great moral evil” – something I think even many committed Christians – neutered by political correctness and decades of “gay” propaganda – today would have a hard time admitting (to their shame). Johnson, writing in 1996, had not yet experienced the attachment of this moral evil to the noble institution of marriage itself (as is now legal in the U.K and in 16 American states). Sin’s advance – like an insatiable, devouring monster — destroys people and cultures, and displaces virtue with man-centered notions of wrong as right (Isaiah 5:20).

But God’s Truth – our Creator’s standard of righteousness – is unchanged – despite fanatical efforts by religious homosexuals to co-opt even Christianity itself. Like homosexual (mis)behavior, the ideology of homosexualism – proud homosexuality aggressively defended as a “civil right” and moral good – is an egregious sin before God. (For if, as the Word of God teaches, homosexual practice is detestable and always sinful in God’s sight, how can a movement based on condoning and celebrating it be any less so?) [See Leviticus 20:13 (note the context), Jude 7 (a verse liberals conveniently ignore in distorting the meaning of Sodom and Gomorrah), Romans 1:26-27, and 1 Corinthians 6:7-11.]

Of course, we in America have our own arrogant and vengeful “gay” (LGBT) “monster in our midst” — and I warned the Jamaicans that they, too, will have one if they give in to Western powers by opening up the Pandora’s box of homosexual “rights” in their country. The smart and resolute Jamaican leaders and pastors whom I encountered understand the tragic lesson from Britain and the United States: all attempts to appease this self-justifying Sin Movement are doomed to fail, as each concession leads only to further, and more radical, demands.

Jamaican Pastor Rev. Everal Edwards (left) of Church of the Open Bible in Kingston, with AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera, who was a guest speaker at the church. “Right is right, and wrong is wrong,” said Edwards, in response to international pressure on Jamaica to repeal its anti-buggery law banning homosexual conduct. The law is largely unenforced but repealing it is only the first in a long chain of homosexual activist demands in the island nation.

It was the Irish statesman Edmund Burke who famously said: “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.” Let us hope and pray that the Jamaicans (and Russians, Czechs, Poles, etc.) succeed at stopping the LGBT juggernaut and avoiding our tragic fate. Please pass on this excerpt to others – especially those who naively – or cravenly – counsel “compromise,” retreat or surrender in the face of escalating homosexual activist demands.  – Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

_____________________________

Johnson “Monster in our Midst” Passage:

Excerpt from The Quest for God: A Personal Pilgrimage, by Paul Johnson (pages 28-29) [emphasis is added, and for readability I have also broken in half the paragraph beginning, “I believe…”]:

…after a section in which Johnson discusses radical, worldly movements – race, sexual, environment and health politics — that collectively present an alternative to God and traditional religion:

“The radical agenda …with its strong appeal to the idealistic, as well as the materialistic, instincts of mankind, especially among young people, does constitute an alternative religion. Like any other form of humanism, it replaces God by man, and the welfare – or supposed welfare – of man, rather than the worship of God and obedience to his commandments, as the object of human existence and the purpose of society. That, of course, is its defect. The Jesuit theologian Karl Rahner once argued that it is the consciousness of God, the acceptance that there is power outside and above ourselves, to whom we owe allegiance and whose guidance we must follow, which essentially distinguishes mankind from other creatures. If belief in God were ever to fade completely from the human mind, we would not, Promethean-like, become masters of our fate; on the contrary, we would descend to the status of very clever animals, and our ultimate destiny would be too horrible to contemplate.

I believe this argument to be profoundly true, and corroborated by history, and what worries me about the new radical agenda is the danger that it will dehumanise man just as the totalitarian alternatives did, though no doubt in rather different ways. But there are further, related objections. All the items on the agenda lend themselves to extremism. Take, for instance, the issue of homosexuality, an important part of the sexual politics item. There were many of us, in the 1960s, who felt that there were grave practical and moral objections to the criminalisation of homosexuality, and who therefore supported, as happened in most Western countries, changes in the law which meant that certain forms of homosexual behavior ceased to be unlawful. Homosexuality itself was still to be publicly regarded by society, let alone by the churches, as a great moral evil, but men who engaged in it, within strictly defined limits, would no longer be sent to prison. We believed this change to be the maximum homosexuals deserved or could reasonably expect.

Paul Johnson

We were proved totally mistaken. Decriminalisation made it possible for homosexuals to organise openly into a powerful lobby, and it thus became a mere platform from which further demands were launched. Next followed demands for equality, in which homosexuality was officially placed on the same moral level as standard forms of sexuality, and dismissal of identified homosexuals from sensitive positions, for instance in schools, children’s homes, etc., became progressively more difficult. This was followed in turn by demands not merely for equality but privilege: the appointment, for instance, of homosexual quotas in local government, the excision from school textbooks and curricula, and university courses, passages or books or authors they found objectionable, special rights to proselytise, and not least the privilege of special programmes to put forward their views – including the elimination of the remaining legal constraints – on radio and television. Thus we began by attempting to right what was felt an ancient injustice and we ended up with a monster in our midst, powerful and clamouring, flexing its muscles, threatening, vengeful and vindictive towards anyone who challenges its outrageous claims, and bent on making fundamental – and to most of us horrifying – changes to civilised patterns of sexual behavior.

Here indeed we have sexual politics in action. And, as with other alternatives to God, the result is not human happiness, but human misery. The homosexual community, as they now styled themselves, by their reckless promiscuity during the 1970s and 1980s, helped to spread among their members the fearful scourge of AIDS, a killer disease of a peculiarly horrible nature, for which there is no cure, and no immediate likelihood of a cure….