Dr. John Diggs says male homosexual behavior should be discouraged for public health reasons. In 2002, Diggs authored a white paper on the “Health Risks of Gay Sex.”

The following is excerpted from an article in CNSNews.com:  

Homosexuals Squelch Facts About MRSA Outbreak, Conservatives Say
By Pete Winn
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
January 28, 2008

(CNSNews.com) – Conservative groups say the truth about a new “multi-drug resistant microbe” prevalent among homosexual men is not being presented to the public because of political correctness.

Almost two weeks ago, researchers announced they have isolated a new form of MRSA, or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, an infection that is spreading through San Francisco’s homosexual community and could spread to the general community.

“These multi-drug resistant infections often affect gay men at body sites in which skin-to-skin contact occurs during sexual activities,” said Binh Diep, the University of California-San Francisco scientist who led the team that made the finding.

In fact, the researchers determined that this variant of MRSA infection is 13 to 14 times more prevalent in homosexual men than for the general population.

But the media are now obscuring that fact, according to Matt Barber, director of cultural policy for Concerned Women for America (CWA).

“The real story here is the way that the media have whitewashed this outbreak,” Barber told Cybercast News Service. “It is amazing to see what they’ve done with this.”…

Internationally known infectious disease specialist Dr. John Diggs is siding with the conservatives. The Massachusetts-based physician said treating any infection in a politically correct manner could be dangerous. Treating MRSA that way could prove fatal.

“This outbreak is especially troubling because it is a community-based form of MRSA,” said Diggs, who is an executive committee member of the Physicians Consortium. “Until recently, MRSA has typically been confined to hospitals. The implications are very serious, because we don’t know exactly where this is going to go.”

Medically speaking, any break in the skin that is exposed to the organism can then set off an infection, which can destroy “a lot of tissue” before it’s brought under control, Diggs said.

“You can take something that was relatively isolated in a small place, and suddenly, when it spreads to the general population, things such as school wrestling matches, or football games or basketball games or other sporting events, can take on a specter – they can become deadly,” he added.

The fact is, the epicenter for this outbreak is among men who are having sex with men, Diggs told Cybercast News Service. Researchers identified the rates of drug resistance on the basis of ZIP codes, not ideology.

“The particular ZIP codes they looked at were ones that were associated primarily with men who were having sex with other men,” he said, “the Castro district in San Francisco and also a healthcare center called the Fenway, here in Massachusetts, in Boston.”

Diggs noted that the study itself pointed out that the infection manifests as “an abscess in the buttocks, genitals or perineum” and concluded that it “probably started out in San Francisco, and has been disseminated by the frequent cross-coastal travel” of homosexual men traveling from San Francisco to Boston.

“Men who practice anal sex, men who have promiscuous sex, men who have multiple partners in short periods of time are much more likely to spread this disease,” he said. “It’s not because of who they are. It’s because of that they do.”

“Now I know that a lot of people have attacked those who have brought this to people’s attention as being homophobic, but the real issue – and you have to face the facts – is that men who have sex with men have very high rates of sexually transmitted disease,” Diggs said.

“When you face that reality, then you have to start taking a serious look and deciding that the best public health intervention is to discourage behavior that causes the infection to spread.”

The biggest problem with this new strain – as with any variant of MRSA, Diggs said, is that it is increasingly difficult to find drugs that will effectively combat the problem.

Click HERE to read the whole CNSNews.com article

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

____________________________

Emphasis in bold is added to all quotations below: 

‘Extramarital Outlets’ and Homosexual ‘Monogamy’

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

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

Radically Alter an ‘Archaic Institution’

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

Ending Marriage’s ‘Sexist Trappings’

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

Transform the Definition of Family 

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

‘Being Queer Means Transforming the Very Fabric of Society’ 

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

New Gay Model: Monogamy Not Essential for Marriage

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

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

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

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

Churches: Homophobic, Antiquated Backwaters

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

Make Anti-Gays Look Nasty

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

‘Gay’ Ret. Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr allowed to critique Republican candidates’ answers

CNN flew in Retired Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr — a homosexual activist and Log Cabin Republicans member who now crusades for allowing admitted homosexuals in the U.S. military — to its GOP presidential debate Wednesday, so he could CRITIQUE the candidates’ responses to his question about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” At left is how Kerr — who calls the GOP candidates “partisanly homophobic” — appeared on video during the CNN/YouTube Republican debate. CNN also had another Log Cabin activist ask a pro-homosexual question at the debate. Photo: CNN/YouTube.

CNN’s pro-homosexual presidential debate was moderated by Anderson Cooper. A major homosexual magazine, OUT, has “outed” Cooper as one of the nation’s most influential homosexuals. Though Cooper is mum on his “sexual orientation,” his pro-“gay” bias is abundantly clear at CNN, as it was again at Wednesday’s debate. Homosexual activists would come harder after Cooper if his reportage was not so “gay”-friendly. See AFTAH’s adjoining story, “Does CNN’s Anderson Cooper Have a Conflict of Interest on ‘Gay’ Issues?”

TAKE ACTION: Write CNN News at www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?92 and/or Anderson Cooper at http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?10 to comment on their egregious pro-homosexual and anti-Republican bias and lack of professionalism in the CNN/Youtube presidential debate Wednesday.

____________________________

By Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.org

Dear Americans For Truth Reader,

The liberals over at CNN are so committed to open homosexuality in the U.S. armed forces that they flew in a retired homosexual Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr to participate in their Republican presidential debate Wednesday — so he could critique the GOP candidates’ responses to HIS OWN loaded YouTube question opposing “Don’t’ Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Is it just me, but could you in your wildest imagination picture CNN recruiting Stephen Bennett, a pro-family, EX-“gay” Christian, to ask Democrat presidential candidates a question opposing homosexuality, and then flying him in to critique their responses?

If Kerr’s sneak attack wasn’t bad enough, CNN followed it up a second YouTube question from a homosexual activist — this time it was David Cercone, a Florida Log Cabin Republicans member who, it turns out, is backing [another democratic presidential contender].

Needless to say, no conservative questions on the homosexual issue were heard from the floor or YouTube at the debate.

 Fred Phelps has expanded on his obnoxious “God Hates Fags” message to now protest U.S. soldiers’ funerals, “thanking” God for terrorist killings of our troops as punishment for America’s embrace of homosexuality. Above, “IEDs” stands for “improvised explosive devices,” of the sort used to bomb American military vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan. Americans For Truth condemns Phelps’ unbiblical messages and his grotesque targeting of soldiers’ funerals for his clan’s protests. (In 2005, the Kansas ‘minister’ said then Illinois Family Institute Executive Director Peter LaBarbera was going to hell after LaBarbera condemned his “God Hates Fags” protests.) Phelps’ military pickets like the above have led to enactment of a federal law and state laws restricting protests at military funerals; he is challenging the constitutionality of such laws. As Gary Glenn writes below, Phelps also has a history of denying the power of Jesus Christ to change the lives of people caught up in homosexual behavior (although he now seems to at least grant that possibility on his website, http://www.godhatesfags.com/).  Americans For Truth commends Gary Glenn’s excellent statement on Phelps below.

______________________________

The following statement was issued by Gary Glenn, president of American Family Association of Michigan in May 2006, upon learning that Fred Phelps of “God Hates Fags” notoriety was planning to stage a protest at a military funeral in Michigan (emphasis added):

Fred Phelps and Homosexual Activists Both Wrong
By Gary Glenn

The American Family Association of Michigan believes that homosexual behavior is harmful and wrong.  Without apology, we oppose attempts by the Triangle Foundation [a Detroit-based homosexual organization] and other homosexual activist groups to force their political agenda onto our children, our public schools, and society at large.

We approach the public policy debate surrounding homosexual behavior with sincere Christian care and concern for individuals who we believe put themselves physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually at risk by engaging in such behavior, and with a spirit for protecting children and others put at risk by those who promote and enable such behavior.

We personally know parents who in 2004 helped gather signatures to enact a Marriage Protection Amendment to our state constitution — reaffirming marriage as only between one man and one woman — not because they “hate” their children who are involved in homosexual relationships, but because they love them.

The sincere Christian compassion which motivates our stand is marked by warning against — and protecting those we love from — harmful self-destructive behavior, not by the false compassion of enabling or passing special laws to protect such behavior. 

That’s in sharp contrast to the self-described, expressly hate-motivated message of the Kansas “reverend” who plans to picket a local military funeral this weekend.

Fred Phelps insists that individuals who engage in homosexual behavior are beyond hope or redemption, a false doctrine that — while at odds with the true Christian gospel of repentance and forgiveness available to all — is much closer to that of homosexual activists who echo Phelps’ insistence that individuals involved in homosexual behavior have no hope of abandoning that lifestyle. 

We strongly disagree.  The false gospel preached by Fred Phelps and the Triangle Foundation is proven wrong by the life experience of individuals who through faith, with God’s help, have abandoned homosexual activity and now live their lives in normal loving relationships between a man and a woman, many married with children.  In four Michigan cities, counseling services are available staffed by individuals who themselves abandoned homosexual behavior and are compassionately committed to giving others hope and help in doing so.  (For example, see http://www.corduroystone.com/ in Lansing or http://www.recmin.org/ in Sterling Heights, [Michigan].)

Janice Shaw Crouse (JCrouse@cwfa.org) of CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute deals with the elephant in the room in this excellent article, reprinted from Concerned Women for America’s website (emphasis added). Crouse is one of the few public policy experts to puncture the latest propaganda theme pushed by ‘AIDS activists’ — i.e., “heterosexual women” as the leading growth group for contracting the disease. As she states, “The fine print reveals that the heterosexual category includes persons who have had sex with bisexual men and drug users.” In other words, reckless behaviors including anal sex — not heterosexuality — are the problem. Please help us give this article the widest circulation possible. –Peter LaBarbera 

Anybody Can Get It?    

Published by Concerned Women for America, Oct. 17, 2007

By Janice Shaw Crouse, Beverly LaHaye Institute

The politically correct mantra about HIV/AIDS is that “anybody can get it

The politically correct mantra about HIV/AIDS is that “anybody can get it.” This half-truth is as bizarre as pointing to the tragic death of professional naturalist Steve Irwin, best known as “The Crocodile Hunter,” and saying “anyone can die from the barb of a stingray.” There is an obvious missing piece in both instances. You’re not going to die from a stingray’s barb unless you dive in waters that are home to stingrays. Likewise, unless you (1) Have intimate sexual contact with someone who is infected with the HIV/AIDS virus, (2) Share contaminated needles to do drugs, or (3) Are a healthcare worker who comes in direct contact with the body fluids of an infected person (or as in the heartrending case of Kimberly Bergalis, who contracted AIDS from her infected dentist), you will not, I repeat, you will NOT contract HIV/AIDS.

Another phony slogan foisted off on the public is that women are the “new face of HIV/AIDS.” These myths are among the pernicious efforts to disperse the stigma associated with a disease that is almost exclusively a homosexual male and drug addict epidemic. Insidious myths like these leave today’s young people misinformed, misled and, thus, unprotected.

In fact, Unprotected is the title of an important book that every parent of teenage children needs to read. It exposes the political correctness that leaves college students especially vulnerable to a whole range of health and emotional problems. The author, Miriam Grossman, M.D., is a psychiatrist who has worked for two decades with college students and served during the past decade at the student health center at the University of California at Los Angeles.

Others have commented on various aspects of Dr. Grossman’s exposé of the biases that harm students at university student health centers. I was especially appalled that basic medical knowledge about the transmission of the HIV/AIDS virus is kept from students. In spite of the fact that we are now well past the quarter century mark in the AIDS epidemic, and in spite of the fact that 1 in every 500 college students may be HIV positive, basic HIV/AIDS information is not known by the general public; our students in particular, the very ones most in need of truth to reinforce self-discipline, are not fully informed about the facts.

We treat HIV/AIDS differently from any other public health threat. While doctors are required by law to report nearly 50 communicable diseases (including tuberculosis, measles, syphilis, meningitis), and people with those communicable diseases are ordered by law to get treatment or go to jail, United States laws prohibit disclosure of anyone’s HIV status. Even the HIV tests use a code name to avoid identifying any infected persons. Thus, the only way anyone knows that a person has the virus is if that information is voluntarily given.

Conservapedia, a new online encyclopedia seeking to become a conservative alternative to the very liberal-biased Wikipedia, takes a politically incorrect look at the medical phenomenon known as ‘Gay Bowel Syndrome’ — a term that homosexual activists are trying to purge from scientific and popular usage. Gay Bowel Syndrome describes a “clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients,” according to Conservapedia, which cites mainstream medical sources such as Johns Hopkins’ ‘HIV Guide’ in its article with 93 footnotes. An illness associated with Gay Bowel Syndrome significantly increases the risk of HIV Infection.

Homosexual activists like San Francisco researcher Michael Scarce resent it and cry “homophobia!” when the obvious health risks linked to male homosexual behavior are brought up in debate, much less studied by scientists. After all, that’s “discrimination” since everything is “equal,” right? Tragically, the loud protests of “gay” militants have succeeded in politicizing HIV/AIDS and discouraging objective research on the maladies associated with perversions popular among “gay” men, especially anal sex.

We at Americans For Truth believe that it is long past time for federal and state governments (and academia) to study the serious health risks associated with male homosexual sex and promiscuity, just as federally-sponsored studies helped educate the public on the significant dangers of smoking. Allowing homosexual activists a “protester’s veto” over legitimate medical inquiry and research will only cost more men’s lives, as larger society and especially young men are denied clear information on the special health risks of “gay” sex viz a viz normal, natural straight sex.

And the fact that some straights engage in deviant practices like anal sex is hardly a reason to downplay or cover up the real dangers associated with popular “gay” male sex acts like sodomy and “rimming” (oral-anal “sex”) — which are already being promoted to “gay youth” (read AFTAH’s story, “Graphic Youth Flier Guides ‘Queer’ ‘Boyz’ on How to Engage in Homosexual Sodomies.”) As you can read below, homosexual male promiscuity only exacerbates those dangers.

The politically correct silence keeps potentially life-saving information from children: many schools shy away from teaching students that male homosexual behavior carries a disproportionate risk even for contracting H.I.V. That would undermine the “gay equality” thesis favored by many liberals. (Click HERE to read a about the dramatic rise in HIV cases among young homosexual men in New York City.)

Below is an excerpt from Conservapedia’s article on “Gay Bowel Syndrome.” Note the last section cited below in which a researcher who agrees with Scarce that use of “Gay Bowel Syndrome” is “homophobic” nevertheless feels the need to warn healthcare professionals about Scarce’s “use of vulgar language, ribald poetry, and [his own] personal sexual details” in his book. 

After you read the GBS piece, take a look at Conservapedia’s well-researched article on Homosexuality. — Peter LaBarbera

________________________

Excerpted from “Gay Bowel Syndrome” (emphasis added)

Conservapedia.com

Gay bowel syndrome, which has also been described as gay bowel disease, was named as an illness in 1976 in the medical literature via the journal Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science and in 2004 Medscape stated that gay bowel syndrome is a significant issue in regards HIV infection. (The Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website also features an article which is essentially a duplicate of the aforementioned article at Medscape.) Gay bowel syndrome is a clinical pattern of anorectal and colon diseases which occur with unusual frequency in homosexual patients (the diseases are not exclusive to male homosexuals).

“The leaders of America’s anti-gay industry are directly responsible for the continuing surge in hate violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. … The right went into demonic, anti-gay hyperdrive following the Supreme Court’s Lawrence v. Texas decision in July of 2003. Since then, church pews have been awash in ugly, anti-gay rhetoric and fear-mongering. … The literal blood of thousands of gay people physically wounded by hatred during 2004 is on the hands of Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Tony Perkins and so many others who spew hate for partisan gain and personal enrichment.”
–Statement from Matt Foreman, Executive Director, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, April 26, 2005, blaming “anti-gay crime” on “America’s anti-gay industry”

Dear Readers,

The preposterous and astonishingly bigoted rant above by Matt Foreman, head of the second largest homosexual organization in America, illustrates the dangerous potential of pro-homosexual, pro-transsexual “hate crimes” legislation, S. 1105, which reportedly could come up for a vote before the U.S. Senate TODAY.

TAKE ACTION : Call your U.S. Senators today at 202-224-3121, or write then via www.congress.org. Urge them to oppose the Kennedy-Smith-Reid Hate Crimes Bill, S. 1105. Pass this message on to your friends and contact list.

A strengthened federal “Hate crimes” law — which would include transsexuals (perceived “gender identity”) for the first time in federal law — would provide a powerful foundation for politically-motivated, pro-homosexual prosecutors to go after people of faith, based on their alleged “anti-gay” speech.

Foreman is lying about the link between Christians and violent, despicable crimes, just as the homosexual lobby is lying about the supposedly pressing need for this legislation (see below). The last thing America needs is to put the power of the federal government behind a system of law that creates a politically correct hierarchy of victims — in a country where homosexual victims already receive far more media attention than religious victims like Mary Stachowicz.

S 1105 would also spend YOUR tax dollars on biased “anti-hate” programs that invariably discriminate against faith-based opposition to homosexuality.

No need for this bill

A thorough report on S 1105 by the Traditional Values Coalition states that S. 1105 “makes the following fraudulent and ridiculous claims in [its] Findings:

• Homosexuals are fleeing across state lines to avoid persecution;
• Perpetrators are crossing state lines to commit crimes against them;
   
• Homosexuals are so persecuted they have trouble purchasing goods and services or finding employment. [now that’s a whopper–Editor]
   
• These false claims about homosexuals fleeing across state lines are being used as a hook to justify federal involvement in local law enforcement through the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
   
• No Epidemic Of Hate Crimes Exists! S. 1105 falsely claims in The Findings, without any evidence, that “the incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.”
   
• FBI statistics from 2005 (the latest available) reveal that there is no national epidemic of hate against minority groups or against homosexuals:
   
• According to the FBI, in 2005 there were only 5,190 hate crimes directed against all persons. Of this figure, only 1,171 were sexual orientation bias crimes. Out of this 1,171:
   
• 301 were listed as “intimidation.”
   
• 333 were listed as “simple assault.”
   
• 177 were listed as aggravated assault! There was one forcible rape and no murders based on sexual orientation in 2005.
   
• 1 forcible rape; 30 robberies; 10 burglaries; 27 larceny-theft; 2 motor vehicle theft; 1 arson; 275 damage/vandalism; 3 other; 5 crimes against society.
   
• Nationwide there were 862,947 aggravated assaults against all persons. (Source: FBI Crime in the United States 2005, Aggravated Assault)
• Out of 862,947 cases of aggravated assault, only 177 were motivated by sexual orientation bias. This is 0.000205 percent of all aggravated assaults in 2005.
   
• In a nation of 300 million, this is no epidemic of hate against homosexuals that needs federal involvement in local law enforcement. (Source: Tables 2 and 4, FBI Hate Crime Stats, 2005)

My good friend Bob Knight lays out the basic problems with expanded, pro-homosexual federal “hate crimes”, arguing that legislation like S. 1105:

• violates the concept of equal protection under the law by designating special classes of victims, who get a higher level of government protection than others victimized by similar crimes.
• politicizes criminal law, leading to pressure on police and prosecutors to devote more of their limited resources to some cases, at the expense of other crime victims’ cases.
• vastly expands the power and jurisdiction of the federal government to intervene in local law enforcement matters, once a crime is called a “hate crime.”
• has a chilling effect on free speech by making unpopular ideas a basis for harsher treatment in criminal proceedings. More than half of the so-called “hate crimes” in the last U.S. Justice Department report were categorized as “intimidation” or “simple assault,” which do not necessarily involve anything more than words.2 In terms of the proposed national hate crimes bill, this makes name-calling literally a federal case.
• confuses law enforcers, because the definition of what constitutes a “hate crime” is clear in some instances but unclear in others. This burdens prosecutors and opens up endless opportunities for defense attorneys to invoke technicalities.
• is not necessary. There is no evidence to substantiate the claim that “hate crime” victims are receiving less justice than other crime victims.

The last thing America needs is to expand federal power unnecessarily while creating the foundation for dubious federal “rights” based on homosexuality and gender confusion. Read the full TVC report on S. 1105 HERE. And call your Senators today at 202-224-3121, or e-mail them at http://www.congress.org/.

This “hate crimes” bill has already passed the House, so if it passes the Senate, we will be urging President Bush to wield his presidential veto: call the White House comment line at 202-456-1111 or use the Contact Page on the presidential website.

Thank you for standing up for truth and freedom.

Sincerely,

Peter LaBarbera

Americans For Truth

  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.”)