Breaking News: White House helped craft religious language for pro-homosexual ENDA bill; AFTAH urges Bush to pledge to veto bill in any form

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was written in 2007. Four years later, passage of the ENDA bill — now HR 1397 — is a high priority of the Obama administration. Go HERE for a GovTrack report on the 2011 version of this dangerous bill. — Peter LaBarbera, May 16, 2011. 

AFTAH has learned that White House staffers helped negotiate the new religious exemption language for the radical homosexual employment bill ENDA, H.R. 3685. Will that make it harder for President Bush to veto ENDA should it pass Congress? Call or contact the President (202-456-1111; www.whitehouse.gov/contact) and urge him to veto ENDA in any form should it pass Congress.

By Peter LaBarbera 

BREAKING NEWS/URGENT UPDATE: Americans For Truth has learned that a White House official has boasted to pro-family leaders attending a private Administration briefing that White House staffers were involved in the negotiations to craft expanded religious exemption language for the new ENDA bill, H.R. 3685 (discussed below). Call President Bush at 202-456-1111 or 202-456-1414 (www.whitehouse.gov/contact) to urge him to publicly pledge to veto the dangerous ENDA (Employment Nondiscrimination Act) bill, H.R. 3685 in ANY form should it pass.

At the briefing, the White House official did not commit to the assembled evangelical leaders that the President would veto H.R. 3685, saying that they will wait to see the bill’s final language, according to our source. This is troubling in that vetoing ENDA in any form is regarded as a “no-brainer” by pro-family activists, who are counting on Bush to stop it. Failure to veto ENDA would be a devastating defeat for pro-family forces and a huge gift to homosexual lobbyists. Call the President (202-456-111) and urge him to “please publicly pledge to veto ENDA, H.R. 3685, in any form if it passes Congress.”

Some religious leaders take comfort in ENDA’s exemptions; we do not (see Points 8 and 13 below).  White House involvement in negotiations over ENDA is problematic in that makes it more difficult for President Bush to veto the bill. As you can read below, H.R. 3685’s current religious exemption will hardly affect the many ways in which ENDA would erode and destroy the freedom of Americans to act on their deeply-held moral beliefs about homosexuality.

Also, CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN and SENATORS today and next week to oppose H.R. 3685, which is a watered-down version of a more radical version of ENDA, H.R. 2015 (see Point 10 below). Like H.R. 2015 — for which homosexual and transsexual activists are still crusading — H.R. 3685 has tremendous potential to criminalize Christianity in the United States by creating federal “rights” based on wrong and destructive lifestyles.
 
Yesterday, H.R. 3685 was voted out of the House Education and Labor Committee by a vote of 27-21 (some Democrats voted “no” because it wasn’t liberal enough; see Point 10 below). It is now headed for a House floor vote, possibly early next week. Call 202-224-3121 or go to http://www.congress.org/ to reach your Representative and U.S. Senators.

Here are 14 good reasons to oppose the revised ENDA, H.R. 3685:

1. ENDA and H.R. 3685 would create federally-protected “rights” based on immoral, unhealthy and changeable homosexual/bisexual behavior — masquerading as “orientation” — setting a dangerous legal, moral and spiritual precedent. Homosexuality is not a “civil right”; it is a human wrong — one that is redeemable as proven by thousands of contented former homosexuals and ex-lesbians. Our Founding Fathers, infused with a Biblical view of fallen man, created limited government that sought to restrain the sinful outworking of men’s hearts (including the lust for power, hence our system of checks and balances). The law once punished sin (e.g., sodomy and anti-abortion laws), so it is preposterous to say that homosexuality-affirming laws are necessary to uphold basic, “constitutional rights.” ENDA represents the complete rejection of the Judeo-Christian Western legal tradition by creating newfangled legal “rights” that actually reward errant lifestyles and sexual misbehavior.
2. ENDA/H.R. 3685  would be used to defend the placement of openly homosexual and bisexual teachers in our nation’s public schools in ALL localities (see # 7). For the more activist-minded homosexual teachers who are already in schools, H.R. 3685 could lead them to more boldly promote and discuss their lifestyle in the classroom, as schools could be sued for discrimination if they dared to discipline activist “gays.”
3. ENDA/H.R. 3685 would punish Christians and religious traditionalists by leading directly to the loss of freedom for tradition-minded business owners with 15 or more employees. Take the example of an Orthodox Jewish owner of a for-profit day-care business who would NEVER hire an avowed homosexual, lesbian or bisexual as a supervising adult care-giver, because he believes Scriptural teachings that homosexual practice is immoral and reflects poorly on one’s character. This religious man would qualify for the exemption to ENDA if he has 14 or less workers. But God forbid that his business grows to 15 or more employees, because then, under ENDA, he could no longer apply his religious and moral beliefs about same-sex sin in his hiring and firing decisions . It must be remembered that top homosexual strategists now assert that their “moral” claim (the right not to be treated differently based on their “sexual orientation”) trumps our religious/moral obligation to oppose homosexuality.
4. ENDA is unnecessary: there is no outbreak of homosexuals getting fired; in fact, it is Christians defending their faith in the public square who are getting fired  and mistreated  — like Matt Barber, who was terminated by Allstate Insurance in 2005 after writing an online article on his own time critical of homosexual “marriage.”  Moreover, private companies are racing to create pro-homosexual policies on their own: Kodak now gives special preference to homosexually-owned subcontractors as one of several “minorities” receiving favored consideration. We strongly disagree with these “gay”-affirmative-action-type policies, but corporations have the right to pursue them. However, with the proliferation of such corporate programs, there is no need for the heavy hand of government to act as a corporate Big Brother, forcing all companies to affirm homosexuality in their hiring and firing decisions. Let the free market decide this issue.
5. ENDA/H.R. 3685 would dramatically expand the power of the federal government and would put it behind ONE SIDE of the homosexuality debate: the politically correct and unbiblical claim that homosexuality is about “rights” and innocuous “orientations.” Therefore it would override traditional understandings of homosexuality as a changeable sin. Federal authority will be asserted to enforce homosexual “rights” over traditional Americans rights to operate their business according to their moral beliefs. At the very least, with half the nation still believing that homosexual behavior is wrong, the government should be neutral on this issue.
6. ENDA is a “gay” lawyer’s dream: it would be abused by litigious homosexual activists, who seem to have a special gift for lying about conservatives and exaggerating their own victim status. If history is a guide, ENDA will lead to “gay” harassment lawsuits against people like the theoretical day-care entrepreneur above. Homosexual activists have already used dirty tactics to harass and take down pro-family leaders like Larry Cirignano, Scott Lively, and Gary Glenn — all victims of trumped-up “gay” charges. Glenn was falsely accused by a homosexual activist group, the Triangle Foundation, of favoring the murder of homosexuals (this writer has also been falsely accused of this). Cirignano recently had “civil rights” charges against him dropped after a lesbian invaded his Catholic group’s rally and then claimed that he assaulted her. Lively, founder of Abiding Truth Ministries, was hit with a highly-publicized lawsuit in 1991 based on similar trumped-up charges. Oregon Republican writer Betty Freauf describes what happened: “At one of the O.C.A. meetings, a photo journalist and homosexual-rights activist by the name of Catherine Stauffer attended the [pro-family] meeting uninvited. When asked to leave, she refused. Scott Lively then O.C.A. [Oregon Citizen’s Alliance] executive director, escorted her out of the meeting. She then had her frivolous assault and battery lawsuit which had been the plan all along. Judgments were granted to the plaintiff Stauffer in the amount of $30,000 each against O.C.A. and Scott Lively.”    Certainly, some homosexual activists will not be able to resist using frivolous, ENDA-inspired lawsuits to intimidate conservative business owners into submission — especially those who speak out publicly against “gay marriage,” or oppose the homosexual lobby. Is it really hard to imagine homosexual activists sending “plants” into conservative-owned companies and then suing when the person is not hired, or is fired? Of course, the same might be attempted by apolitical yet greedy “gay” employees and lawyers seeking to manipulate the system through “discrimination” lawsuits.
7. ENDA would trample on the rights of the 30 states without homosexuality-based “sexual orientation” laws — including conservative “red” states like Oklahoma and Texas where there is little voter interest in passing such laws — by turning the whole nation, including all public schools (see #2), into a “special-protections-for-homosexual-workers” zone.
8. ENDA’s “religious exemption” is extremely limited and narrowly tailored: of course, it does NOTHING to protect the freedom of moral-minded small businessmen to hire and fire based on THEIR values system, not the government’s. But beyond that, ENDA’s “religious exemption” is also carefully circumscribed so as to box in non-church, religious-oriented groups, rather than liberate them (see points 12 and 13). Here is how H.R. 3685 defines “religious organization”:
    
   RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION – The term `religious organization’ means–
   (A) a religious corporation, association, or society; or 
   (B) a school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of learning, if– 
   (i) the institution is in whole or substantial part controlled, managed, owned, or supported by a particular religion, religious corporation, association, or society; or
   (ii) the curriculum of the institution is directed toward the propagation of a particular religion
    
   Now think of all the businesses, associations and schools that would NOT be covered by that definition: private, non-church or non-religious schools, day-care centers not directly tied to a church; small secular businesses (15 or more employees, including part-timers) owned by Christians; etc.               Moreover, Matt Barber (see #4), Policy Director for Cultural Issues at Concerned Women for America and AFTAH Board Member, makes this excellent point on the constitutionality of ENDA’s religious exemption: “For any religious exemption to pass constitutional muster, [it] would have to follow the individual business owner.  The First Amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion which applies to all individual citizens, not just to a church, religious organization or corporation.  It is unconstitutional to prevent, by force of law, an individual business owner from considering his sincerely held religious beliefs while determining how to best own and operate his private business.”
9. Even though ENDA proscribes quotas, H.R. 3685 would create de facto preferential status for “gay” employees – or those who claim that status (which is another issue: how does a company “prove” that an employee is or is not “gay”?). Especially for corporations and businessmen who fear lawsuits, ENDA would create a new category of “affirmative action” – for a group of people who, far from demonstrating a history of being disadvantaged economically, rank among the more affluent and privileged groups in society (for example, “gays” travel internationally at rates far higher than other groups) . (See #4 on existing private “gay affirmative action.”)
10. H.R. 3685 is merely the camel’s nose under the tent: even though homosexual Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) “threw tranny off the train” as it were – by backing a watered-down ENDA that does not explicitly cover transsexuals (“gender identity”) – the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender) lobby is united in pushing for the even more radical version of ENDA, H.R. 2015, which fully covers “transgenders.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has agreed to bring that bill to the House floor for a vote if the bill’s sponsors can show they have enough votes to pass it.  Passage of H.R. 3685 would make passing H.R. 2015 — what we’re calling the “Transgender Bathrooms for Business” bill — easier.
11. H.R. 3685 would advance the “same-sex marriage” agenda. It would be cited by activist judges as evidence that America is moving towards pro-homosexual “equality” (read: state-sponsored “inequality” for people of faith). The homosexual agenda always advances incrementally, but federalizing “sexual orientation” law is a long-sought goal of “gay” activists and liberal social engineers seeking to break down our Judeo-Christian traditions by normalizing homosexuality through the law.
12. H.R. 3685’s exemption for “religious organizations” would divide society further by effectively creating a two-tiered system of rights.  Some Christians and religious people operating in exempted religious groups would get the “special right” to factor in their opposition to homosexuality in their hiring and firing decisions — but morality-conscious secular groups and business owners would lose their freedom to similarly defend heterosexual norms. This is not fair. Many nonreligious people oppose homosexual behavior and creating “rights” based on immoral, aberrant sex: why should they have any less freedom to act on their beliefs than religious citizens?
13. ENDA/H.R. 3685 will lead to further compromise in the Church: its religious exemption would mollify pastors and make them LESS likely to stand on principle and fight the aggressive homosexual agenda, since they would be “protected” (for now) from ENDA’s oppressive mandates. Of course, homosexual activists would later seek to tighten or eliminate religious- and church-based exemptions (there’s that incrementalism again). If homosexual activists truly respected people’s freedom to oppose homosexual behavior, would they constantly be complaining about “religious-based discrimination”? Would they be relentlessly attacking the Boy Scouts and have tried to make it illegal for the Scouts not to hire homosexual (and atheist) scoutmasters? Many “gay” advocates view Christian opposition to hiring homosexuals as simply another form of invidious discrimination to be overcome through law, academia and cultural mobilization.
14. ENDA confuses the issue of civil rights in America and trivializes African Americans’ struggle against discrimination. H.R. 3685 insults African-Americans and confuses the civil rights equation considerably by taking the 1964 Civil Rights Act — designed with the noble goal of redressing institutional racism in America — and refitting it to put the U.S. Government officially behind the false concept of homosexuality as a “civil right.” Blacks cannot change their skin color. Homosexuals can leave that lifestyle behind, as many have. (Conversely, people can become “gay” by embracing that ideology and lifestyle. Nobody can “become African American”; that’s how you are born.) Being black is not a moral issue. Embracing sinful and destructive homosexual behavior is. It has long been the goal of “gay” activists to exploit the noble Black civil rights movement — even appropriating its language of “equality” and drawing bogus analogies between ending legal bans on interracial marriage (a good and just reform) and the campaign to legalize homosexual “marriage” (a revolutionary attack on a sacred institution). ENDA would put government muscle behind this exploitation, and make it much easier to teach schoolchildren that homosexuality is a civil rights issue, not a moral one.

The following is excerpted from the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade. For the full story, click HERE:

GOP Reps save ENDA in close committee vote
Kucinich, others vote ‘no’ citing lack of trans protection
By LOU CHIBBARO JR., Washington Blade | Oct 18, 8:14 PM

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) cleared a pivotal hurdle in committee today after four gay-supportive Republicans joined the Democratic majority to save the bill from defeat.

Four pro-gay Democrats, including [a presidential candidate and Congressman], voted against the bill, saying they did so because a provision protecting transgender persons had been removed.

The bill passed in the House Committee on Education and Labor by a vote of 27 to 21, with 23 Democrats and four Republicans voting for the measure, which calls for banning job discrimination based on sexual orientation, a category that includes gay men, lesbians and bisexuals. Seventeen Republicans and the four Democrats voted against the bill.

If the Republicans voting for the measure had voted the other way, it would have lost by a vote of 23 to 25.

“We have never been able to pass a gay rights bill with only Democrats,” said gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), one of the lead sponsors of ENDA. “We’ve always known we need some Republicans.”

The bill is scheduled to go to the full House for a vote next week.

Click HERE for the full Blade article

Wows Americans For Truth Audience with Testimony of Leaving Behind 29 Years of Lesbianism 

___________________________ 

Get a DVD of Cothran, Parker Speeches at AFTAH Banquet!

All proceeds will go to help the work of Americans For Truth 

To order a complete DVD (or CD) of both Charlene Cothran’s and David Parker’s outstanding talks, make an online donation of at least $25 postpaid to Americans For Truth (please use the online form to specify ‘2007 Banquet DVD’. 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 (all postpaid): 2 for $40; 3 for $55; 4 for $70; add $10 for each additional DVD or contact us (630-717-7631) for large bulk order pricing. 

____________________________ 

NOTE:  What better occasion than the homosexual activists’ misguided “National Coming Out Day” (October 11th every year) to publish Charlene Cothran’s testimony — representing a “coming out” story that we who agree with God on homosexuality can get behind? To contact Charlene, write editor@venusmagazine.org.

By Peter LaBarbera

Folks, Americans For Truth’s banquet Friday night was a wonderful event that exceeded our expectations. We packed out our banquet room at the Embassy Suites Hotel – which was actually a fallback location for our event after another hotel had abruptly cancelled our reservation – and everything went smoothly, despite the small “gay” protest outside.

(Click HERE to read about how Gay Liberation Network and other homosexual activists – obsessed as they are with smearing Americans For Truth – are now lying about our banquet numbers, saying that as few as 30 people attended our banquet (do I hear 20?…) when our room was actually packed out with more than 110 attendees.)

Our two keynote speakers, Charlene Cothran and David Parker, were riveting and held the audience in rapt attention until the evening’s end – as I have rarely seen at such an event. Charlene’s heartfelt testimony (portions of which are excerpted below) about how God drew her from her (very “successful”) lesbian lifestyle had so many wonderful lessons to teach: the faithfulness of God; the answered prayers of a faithful mother; the possibility of radical change in the life of even a longtime homosexual (Cothran had lived 29 years as a lesbian); and the need of loving Christians to reach out to homosexual strugglers trying to leave the lifestyle.

Charlene had the Americans For Truth audience laughing right off the bat when she said:

If you had told me two years ago that I would be a featured speaker at the Americans For Truth about Homosexuality banquet, I would have laughed in your face! Because I was one of those girls who would have been outside across the street with the gang trying to prevent this from happening. But God has a way of bringing us full circle, doesn’t He?  

Full circle, indeed. As a leading African-American homosexual activist and the most successful minority publisher in the “gay” world with her Venus Magazine – which she now uses to spread the Gospel of Christ — Cothran once partnered with a host of homosexual activist groups to advance that cause: Human Rights Campaign (back then it was called Human Rights Campaign Fund); the National Black Gay and Lesbian Leadership Forum; the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; and PFLAG (Parents, Friends and Families of Lesbians and Gays), to name a few.

Many of those groups do everything they can to hide the truth from the public that men and women like Charlene are walking away from homosexuality.

Cothran continued:

“It was right here in Chicago … back in 2003 at a ‘gay pride’ event – out in Bryant Park, on a sunlit afternoon where I should have been the proudest lesbian out there….At any other pride event, I was always very proud to be there. … But on this day a shame fell on me, and something spoke in my spirit and said: ‘This is that road that’s leading to destruction, and you are on it.’ And it was such a loud voice that I could no longer ignore that what I was doing and how I was living was wrong.

“There are workplace situations — communal showers, for example — when the demands of the transgender community fly in the face of conventional norms and therefore would not pass in any Congress. I’ve talked with transgender activists and what they want — and what we will be forced to defend — is for people with penises who identify as women to be able to shower with other women.” –– Homosexual Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), back when he opposed including “transgenders” in the Employment NonDiscrimination Act (ENDA). Frank later relented but since has signed on to a watered-down version of ENDA (H.R. 3685) that dropped the “trans” language.

The “gay” activist movement’s partnership with the “transgender” cause is costing it votes for the expansive version of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), H.R. 2015, on Capitol Hill, so a new version of the bill (H.R. 3685) was floated that throws out the “gender equity” provisions. (H.S. 3685 also simplifies the bill’s religious exemption.) Now that version is being rejected by major homosexual and transsexual groups, led by the Human Rights Campaign (see letter below).

Over the years, homosexual activists including Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) (see quote above) have chafed at their alliance with a transsexual movement — knowing that it only makes their cause look even more radical to the general public. Yet the two movements have been intertwined and their partnership, as symbolized by the “GLBT” acronym (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender), has only strengthened in recent years. 

Transgender activists lobbied HRC to back a “trans”-positive ENDA and the leading homsoexual lobby organization eventually embraced it.

For the moment, the leading pro-homosexual groups are sticking with the  “transgenders,” but word on the Hill is that ENDA’s “trans” language — which AFTAH, CWA and other conservative groups have highlighted (we called ENDA the “Transgender Bathrooms for Business Bill”) — has cost H.R. 2015 key support, including among moderate Democrats.

The following letter (emphasis added) was sent yesterday by the liberal coalition Leadership Conference to Rep. George Miller (D-Cal.), Chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor. Miller’s committee was scheduled to consider the watered-down ENDA (H.R. 3685) this morning until the hearing was cancelled following the “gay”-led coalition effort against it. — Peter LaBarbera

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

1629 K Street, NW
10th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20006
Phone: 202-466-3311
Fax: 202-466-3435
http://www.civilrights.org/

October 1, 2007

The Honorable George Miller, Chairman
Committee on Education and Labor
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Miller:

On behalf of the undersigned organizations, we write to express our opposition to the strategy and process by which the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (HR 3685) is to be considered in the House of Representatives. We ask that the markup in the House Education and Labor Committee, scheduled for less than 24 hours from now, be canceled.

For many years, we have worked to develop an employment non-discrimination bill that protects the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Our organizations support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act as introduced (H.R. 2015).

Although we believe that the bill’s sponsor, Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), and the House Democratic Leadership have a sincere desire to protect the LGBT community from
discrimination, we believe the process and strategy that has been adopted is a mistake. That mistake is compounded by moving forward with a markup tomorrow.

If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Nancy Zirkin, LCCR Vice President, at (202) 263-2880 or Rob Randhava, LCCR Counsel, at (202) 466-6058.

Sincerely,

American Civil Liberties Union
American Friends Service Committee
Gender Public Advocacy Coalition
Human Rights Campaign
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Legal Momentum
National Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Centers
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Center for Transgender Equality
National Council of Jewish Women
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG National)
People For the American Way
Pride At Work, AFL-CIO
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
GLSEN – the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society
The Woodhull Freedom Foundation
Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker
Representative Barney Frank
Representative Tammy Baldwin

A Lesson in the Lies of the Left 

By Peter LaBarbera 

Many homosexual activists love verbally bashing Bible-believing Christians who oppose “gay rights” — calling them various names and insulting them by comparing them to racists and, in the case below, white supremacists. Of course, they rarely use the latter technique against African-American Christians like Harry Jackson, who are increasingly vocal in speaking out against the homosexual activist agenda.

Frank Kameny, the homosexual activist icon who was fired by the federal government in the 50’s and who is currently being honored by the Smithsonian Museum as an American “civil rights” pioneer, coined the term “Christianofascists” to describe groups like Americans For Truth and Concerned Women for America that oppose homosexual activism. Something tells me that Kameny’s anti-Christian smear will not be found in the new Smithsonian’s exhibit about his life — since the academic world, like so many in the media, protects homosexual activists by hiding their more radical associations and beliefs.

(Kameny once addressed a meeting of NAMBLA — North American Man/Boy Love Association, the notorious pederasty group. Another American “gay” founding father, Harry Hay, enthusiastically defended NAMBLA’s right to march in “gay pride” parades.)

Here in Chicago, we have our very own accomplished Christian-bashers — Equality Illinois’ Rick Garcia — who called his own Catholic Cardinal (Francis George) a “bigot” — and, to a greater degree, the Gay Liberation Network, whose Bob Schwartz has a talent for name-calling like few on the Left. 

The easy thing to do would be to dismiss Schwartz and the GLN as part of the vast left-wing network of Christian-haters, and that they are. But as you read this latest rant from Bob, keep in mind that Schwartz’s virulent anti-Christianism is only stating forcefully what many homosexual activists and their allies believe.

Moreover, under government-sponsored pro-homosexuality (“sexual orientation”) laws, those who oppose homosexuality ARE treated as “bigots,” which is why “sexual orientation” legislation like ENDA (the Employment Nondiscrimination Act) is so dangerous. In Western tradition, the law was intended to punish wrongdoers, not people agreeing with God and acting in defense of natural law and time-tested religious and moral beliefs. Does “gay liberation” equate to oppression of religion?

My responses to Schwartz’s comments are in blue:

Poor, beleaguered Peter LaBarbarian. [cute, Bob] Not long after being denied space in a Naperville Holiday Inn for his banquet of bigots [more name-calling — falsely equating pro-family Americans who oppose homosexuality with rank bigotry], the “Americans For Truth About Homosexuality” leader, the would-be il duce of the hard core antigay right-wing, has taken another hit.  Organizers of a diversity in the workplace panel have disinvited the homo hater [disagreement is not hate, Bob], after three other panelists said they would not participate if LaBarbera did.
 

It is good to hear that HRC’s Daryl Herrschaft and others will not appear with hate mongers [more name-calling] who don’t believe we have a right to even exist [Gay Martyr Syndrome: looks like Bob and friends are “existing” quite fine; we simply don’t believe that people are defined by aberrant sexual behaviors, and of course we believe that homosexuals can change and abandon the lifestyle, as so many, like our Oct. 5 banquet speaker, Charlene Cothran, have], much less enjoy equal rights with other Americans [“equal rights” based on what? How you have sex? That’s not in the Constitution]. 
 

People like LaBarbera ought to be treated in the same way as those preaching white supremacy or that Jews are Christ killers who need to convert to Christianity. [Another misleading and hateful statement by Bob and GLN, laced with a profound bigotry against sincere Christians and all people — religious or otherwise — who believe homosexual behavior is wrong. Here he resurrects past societal injustices to justify his own errant lifestyle. I hate anti-Semitism and racism as much as Bob or anyone else; those issues have nothing to do with Americans’ views on the moral questions surrounding homosexuality and gender confusion.]
 

LaBarbera rails against “anti-Christian bigotry.”  This is a sham, a cover for hate hiding behind stained glass windows.  Many religious people held fervent beliefs that Jews and African Americans just didn’t rank up there with the better people, the chosen of god. People who believe and advocate for these things today are shunned as bigots. [Once again, Bob erects his twin straw men of racism and anti-Semitism, knowing full well that we at Americans For Truth abhor both these ills. The practice of homosexuality is shameful, and its celebration more so. Disagreeing with homosexual behavior is nothing more than agreeing with God.]

  Anti-Christian bigotry prevails: Human Rights Campaign’s Daryl Herrschaft threatened to boycott a DiversityInc Magazine forum on “Religion in the Workplace” if Americans For Truth were allowed to participate. The magazine caved in.

By Peter LaBarbera 

“How do you balance the need to create an open and equal workplace for LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] employees with the religious beliefs of those who oppose same-sex relationships?” 
— proposed discussion question for DiversityInc “Religion in the Workplace” roundtable that includes an atheist and a homosexual activist but dropped Americans For Truth after being lobbied by pro-“gay” panelists

Today I was scheduled to fly to Newark, N.J., to participate in a “Religion in the Workplace Roundtable” discussion sponsored by DiversityInc Magazine. But I won’t be going to Newark – because three of the panelists decided that true diversity was something they simply could not tolerate.

On Friday, I received an awkward call from Barbara Frankel, DiversityInc’s Executive Editor, who had originally invited me to take part in the roundtable — along with Daryl Herrschaft, Director of the Workplace Project at Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual activist group, and several other panelists including the president of American Atheists.

An embarrassed Ms. Frankel said she was forced to disinvite me, less than a week before the event, because Herrschaft and two other panelists (she wouldn’t say whom) had threatened not to come if I were allowed to participate. (I had already bought my airline ticket and received planning materials for the discussion.) Ironically, one of the proposed questions for the roundtable was: “How do you balance the need to create an open and equal workplace for LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] employees with the religious beliefs of those who oppose same-sex relationships?”

Frankel apologized and said that she was very upset about this development, but that her hands were tied. Of course, she could have stuck with the original plan and told Herrschaft and his two allies to take a hike, or at least a refresher course on genuine diversity.

Frankel’s decision to cave in to HRC’s demands represents a triumph of the new, Intolerant “Tolerance” over real tolerance. In originally inviting me and Americans For Truth to participate, Frankel – representing the very pro-“gay” DiversityInc — was, to her credit, practicing old-fashioned tolerance: people with divergent worldviews listening and talking respectfully to one another about each other’s viewpoint, in a spirit of civility.

The New Tolerance – epitomized by Herrschaft’s arrogant threat – is “tolerant” in name only. It is driven by ideology and power. Here’s the formula: certain viewpoints that the Left finds intolerable – e.g., that homosexuality is wrong and changeable behavior – must be denied public expression, or at least be marginalized. All to build a “hate-free” society, you see. (Conservative college students know well this counterfeit brand of “tolerance and diversity.”)

By J. Matt Barber

Posted by Concerned Women for America, Sept. 14, 2007

“They feel kind for a season, but remain blind to all reason.” — Matt Barber, just now

Such is the nature of political correctness. And in that spirit, lawmakers — who are purportedly sane — plan to take us all on a “long strange trip” through a mystical fantasyland where the impossible is possible and the objectionable is obligatory.

A vote is expected soon on H.R. 2015, the so-called “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” (ENDA). If passed, the bill would grant special employment rights and protected minority status to individuals who define themselves based upon chosen sexual behaviors and others who — among other things — suffer from clinical self-delusion. It would force employers to abandon their First Amendment civil rights at the workplace door.

More on that later…

In the meantime, two stories. One is fiction, the other is real. Both are fantasy:

Sean was a redheaded, freckled lad of pure Irish descent. Growing up, he always felt something was wrong. He didn’t like green beer, corned beef hash or any of the other things the Irish were supposed to like. Rather, he was fascinated by African-American culture and eventually made the self-determination that he was, in fact, a black man trapped in a white man’s body. No, not like Vanilla Ice, Eminem or other posers; Sean actually believed it.

There were others who felt the same way, and a movement was formed. They called themselves “transracial.” They made up fancy, official sounding terms like “race identity” and “race reassignment surgery.” They demanded special rights and government-mandated benefits such as affirmative action and reparations.

Okay, that hasn’t happened yet (that I know of). The whole idea is pretty ridiculous, right?

Try this on for size:

Sean was a burly truck driver. Growing up, he always felt something was wrong. He preferred Barbie to G.I. Joe and didn’t like football or the other things boys were supposed to like. Rather, he got twitterpated by the way pantyhose felt against his skin and eventually made the self-determination that he was, in fact, a woman trapped in a man’s body.

There were others who felt the same way, and a movement was formed. They called themselves “transgender.” They made up fancy, official sounding terms like “gender identity” and “gender reassignment surgery” and demanded they be granted special rights and government-mandated benefits.

Get the picture?

Listen online (click HERE) as Matt Barber and Martha Kleder of Concerned Women for America discuss ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act:

CWA reports: The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to take up the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), H.R. 2015, as early as next week. As Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, notes, this bill is highly dangerous to the rights of the vast majority of American workers as it forces businesses and organizations to accommodate homosexual, transgender and cross-dresser proclivities. Click HERE to listen