The following statement was released by the Sutherland Institute, a conservative, pro-family public-policy organization based in Salt Lake City, Utah:

Sutherland Statement on Salt Lake City Nondiscrimination Ordinances and LDS  [Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints] Support

In response to the November 10, 2009 decision of the Salt Lake City Council to adopt changes in Salt Lake City’s nondiscrimination ordinances, and to comments presented that evening by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), the Sutherland Institute issued the following statement:

Read the rest of this article »

By Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.org

Dear Readers,

We may be witnessing the “official” split of the American pro-family movement against homosexuality into two camps: the principled groups and churches that oppose all efforts to recognize and approve homosexuality as normal (AFTAH is in this camp); and “soft” family organizations and churches that oppose homosexual “marriage” (and sometimes “civil unions”) but which support other parts of the homosexualist agenda. Below is a version of an e-mail I sent yesterday to pro-family leaders across the United States upon learning of this misguided decision by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) to support special legal “rights” based on homosexuality and gender confusion.

The pro-“gay” decision by the LDS Church to back a local “sexual orientation” law — widely reported by the media — is very bad news for our side.  The proliferation of newfangled laws granting special protections based on objectively disordered sexual/gender behaviors created the basis for punishing dissenters and people of faith long before the “gay marriage” debate became the dominant issue that it is in the “culture wars.”  I think I speak for us all in saying that we are very grateful to the Mormon Church for all it has done to defend against same-sex “marriage” (I personally am astonished by the LDS’ huge contribution to the cause). But “protecting marriage” while legitimizing government-backed preferred status based on changeable, wrong, and very unhealthy (even deadly) behaviors is a Pyrrhic victory if there ever was one.

Moreover, allowing homosexual special rights will only be used by liberal judges to rationalize their imposition of “gay marriage,” anyway (as has already happened), so what’s to be gained by such concessions? [See Gary Glenn’s article on this point HERE]

Read the rest of this article »

Key gay legal activist says homosexual sex is “morally good” — and says her side’s “moral” claims eclipse our right to oppose homosexuality

“As a general matter, once a religious person or institution enters the stream of commerce by operating an enterprise such as a doctor’s office, hospital, bookstore, hotel, treatment center and so on, I believe the enterprise must adhere to a norm of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. … … While I was initially drawn to the idea of providing an exemption to those enterprises that advertise solely in very limited milieus (such as the bed & breakfast that advertises only on Christian Web sites), I became wary of such an approach as a practical matter….”
— Homosexual legal activist, Georgetown law professor, and Obama EEOC appointee Chai Feldblum, “Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion,” 2006, p. 52. Feldblum favors a limited exemption to “gay rights” laws for religious teaching institutions and the “leadership” of faith-based groups.

Will Her ‘Rights’ Replace Yours? In the world of Chai Feldblum (above), defending sodomy and homosexuality-based relationships is a “moral” endeavor. Legally speaking, she sees the battle between “gay rights” and religious/moral opposition to homosexuality as a “zero sum game” — i.e., one side wins and the other side loses. But if the “right” of homosexuals and transsexuals to have their lifestyles approved supersedes the freedom of Americans to act on their belief that homosexual behavior is wrong, then wouldn’t Christians and moral Americans become second-class citizens?

_____________________________

TAKE ACTION: The U.S. Senate will be taking up the Chai Feldblum nomination, probably in the next few weeks. Call and write your two U.S. senators (202-224-3121; www.congress.org) and urge them to oppose her confirmation to be a Commissioner on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Tell your Senators that you oppose awarding superior rights to people based on their homosexual, bisexual or transsexual lifestyle — which they would have if Feldblum’s radical egalitarian philosophy takes hold in the employment realm. Explain that Americans’ First Amendment liberty to follow our conscience should never be made subservient to special interest sexual agendas.

Dear Readers,

AFTAH is featured in the report below by American Family Association’s “One News Now.” about President Obama’s latest homosexual appointee: Georgetown law professor and lesbian legal activist Chai Feldblum as a commissioner at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (Think “sexual orientation discrimination” EEOC lawsuits against businesses if Obama gets his way legislatively.)

Unlike some “gay” activists, Feldblum at least grants that we religious Americans have a legitimate “belief liberty” to oppose homosexuality. But she also asserts that according to her reading of the law and Constitution, homosexuals’ “moral” claims should usually eclipse ours under. (And please forgive me if I don’t gush over Feldblum’s recognition of our moral rights — considering that homosexual practice has been linked as a dominating causal factor for HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases, and that it ranks up there with incest, bestiality and child sacrifice in the Old Testament not-to-do list.)