C-SPAN helped homosexual Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire Vicky Gene Robinson — he was named such because his parents wanted a girl — plead his heretical case to America by airing his speech twice on Christmas Eve night. In the speech, Robinson discussed his plan to enter into a “civil union” with his homosexual lover, saying he always wanted to be a “June bride.” The bishop claimed (against all evidence in Scripture) that the Holy Spirit is involved in the crusade for more open homosexuals like him in the clergy. Write C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb (viewer@c-span.org) or call him (202-737-3220) to protest this holiday programming choice that was deeply offensive to Bible-believing Christians. Urge C-SPAN to balance Robinson’s lecture by covering a presentation by evangelical Dr. Michael Brown in Charlotte, North Carolina next month titled, “Can you be gay and Christian?”  Photo by C-SPAN.

By Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION: Write (viewer@c-span.org) or call C-SPAN (202-737-3220) CEO Brian Lamb today or tomorrow to object to their airing of a speech by a controversial homosexual-clergy activist and Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire, Vicky Gene Robinson, twice on Christmas Eve.  Politely urge C-SPAN to compensate for this offensive, pro-homosexual coverage by sending their cameras to cover evangelical apologist Dr. Michael Brown and his upcoming conference, “Can you be gay and Christian?” to be held Feb. 11-15 in Charlotte, N.C. 

________________________

I’m wondering why C-SPAN chose to re-air a long speech by homosexual activist and Episcopal Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson on Christmas Eve, one of the most sacred days on the Christian calendar. In his speech Nov. 27 at Nova Southeastern University in Ft. Lauderdale, “How Morality Plays a Role in Legal Rights, Especially for the Gay Community,” which had already been aired on Dec. 8, Robinson claimed that the Holy Spirit was involved in the crusade for homosexual “inclusion” in the clergy.

First things first: did you know that the infamously “gay” bishop’s first name is “Vicky” (as you can see above, C-SPAN only put “Gene Robinson” on the screen). Apparently his parents really wanted a girl and — when they doubted their sickly newborn would even live — they named him accordingly: Vicky Imogene (middle name after the mother) Robinson. In 2003, the Concord Monitor reported matter-of-factly (as only the agnostic media can) on the birth of the baby who would become Episcopal “Rev. V. Gene Robinson” as follows:

Robinson was born in Lexington, Ky., in 1947, in a delivery that went so wrong the doctor told his father he needed a name for the baby’s birth and death certificates. Charles and Imogene Robinson had counted on a girl, so Robinson’s father named the baby Vicky Imogene Robinson.

Now, common sense dictates that if you do not want your boy to struggle with masculinity or gender issues, perhaps it is not a good idea to name him “Vicky,” or Susan, or Linda. In this BBC video interview, Robinson calls his father’s decision to give him a girl’s name “a terrible thing to do to a boy child.” 

Indeed, but it gets worse.

 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.

 Which homosexual activist(s) got AFTAH’s “Gay Grinch” award for 2007? Hint: it involves the Boy Scouts. Listen online to find out.

By Peter LaBarbera 

Click HERE to listen to the first hour, and HERE to listen online to the second hour of my guest-hosting appearance Dec. 17 on WYLL (a Christian station outside Chicago, Ill.) for the Sandy Rios Show. Sandy is a dear friend, president of Culture Campaign, a commentator on FOX News, and — I almost forgot — a Great American.

The show features (in the first hour) some great exchanges with my friends, African Americans Rev. Al Cleveland of Rehoboth Empowerment Christian Church and Charlene Cothran, discussing DiversityInc publisher Luke Visconti’s nutty comparison of me to a 19th Century slavery advocate.

The second hour features: an interview with Dan Zanoza of Republicans For Fair Media on CNN’s “political ambush” using a supposed “gay general” at its YouTube Republican Presidential Debate to promote homosexuality in the military; a short but sweet exchange with AFTAH Board Member Mike Heath of the Christian Civic League of Maine on getting men back involved in the “culture war”: and a short interview with Dave Smith of the Illinois Family Institute on his campaign to get the NFL to stop allowing bawdy ads during football games.

You can also listen at the end for AFTAH’s first annual “Gay Grinch” award for 2007. Hint: it involves the Boy Scouts of America.

There’s one big problem with the broadcast: I don’t think I said “um” enough…. Oh well, practice makes perfect. Thanks to Sandy for the opportunity. — Peter LaBarbera

 Can God bless homosexual activism? Nancy Pelosi thinks so. Speaking before the world’s most powerful homosexual pressure group, she said: “God has certainly blessed America with the work of the Human Rights Campaign.” Help Americans For Truth oppose such lies with a tax-deductible, year-end gift.

Recently, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) appeared before a massive fundraiser put on by the largest homosexual pressure group in the world, the Human Rights Campaign, to accept their 2007 National Equality award. In her speech — which you can watch by clicking HERE — Pelosi praised HRC “for being a powerful and positive counterbalance to the voices of hate.” Thus she confuses, as does the group that honors her, defense of marriage and the natural family — and opposition to homosexuality — with “hate.”

Here is how Speaker Pelosi ended her speech:

“Thank you, HRC. May God bless you. God has certainly blessed America with the work of the Human Rights Campaign.”

_____________________________

Support AFTAH with a Year-End Gift! 

Will you support Americans For Truth with a year-end gift to sustain us in our daily battle to answer the lies of the homosexual movement and their powerful allies? Click HERE (http://www.americansfortruth.org/donate/) to donate by credit card or Paypal.  Or you can send your tax-deductible gift of $500, $100, $50 or whatever you can give to: Americans For Truth (AFTAH), P.O. Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. 

_____________________________

Please forward this appeal on to your friends and family members:

A Note from Americans For Truth to Our Supporters:

By Peter LaBarbera

They have the power, the money and the influence.

We have the Truth.

They have Hollywood and the media.

We have the Truth.

They have the schools, the universities, the professional organizations, the corporate “diversity” programs.

We have the Truth. And the simple truth is that homosexual behavior is always wrong, but it can be overcome — like any sin — in a person’s life through the power of the Christ of Christmas, who came not to “condemn the world, but to save the world through Him.” (John 3:17)

If you have a beef with this, take it up with the Coach: coach@ptsalt.com. I think he speaks for many millions of people across the country who are sick and tired of in-your-face homosexual activism and, now, its “transgender” cousin.– Peter LaBarbera 

I’m Homo-Nauseous

By Coach Dave Daubenmire, Pass the Salt Ministries, 11/08/2007 

Warning:  Commentary is not politically correct 

I’m sick of it. I really am.

I’m not homo-phobic. I’m not homo-hateful. I’m not homo-latent. I’m homo-nauseous. I really couldn’t care less where a man desires to put his appendage.

But I’m sick of hearing about it. I’m sick of talking about it. I’m sick of it being force fed to me on TV. 

In all of my life I have never seen such deviancy so openly celebrated.  They are deviant, you know?  No matter how many names they will try and call me, no matter how many “sensitivity” classes they try and send me to, no matter how much tolerance they try and cram down my throat (sorry), the fact remains homosexuals are deviant.

Deviant — One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards.

CWA Release, November 8, 2007

[Call your senators at 202-224-3121 or go to www.congress.org; call President Bush and urge him to veto ENDA if it passes at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111, or www.whitehouse.gov/contact.]

Washington, D.C. — On Wednesday, lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives passed — largely along party lines —  H.R. 3685, the so-called Employment Non-discrimination Act (ENDA), by a vote of 235–184. [Click HERE for the Roll Call and HERE to see which Congressmen voted against their party’s majority.] 

Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, said, “By passing this Orwellian piece of legislation, the Democrat-controlled House has displayed exceptional arrogance.  Congress apparently believes it has carte blanche authority to nullify any constitutional provision which it finds bothersome.  In this case, they’ve drawn a black line through the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.”  

ENDA contains an extremely weak religious exemption which might partially protect some religious organizations but would leave many others — such as Bible bookstores and many Christian schools — entirely unprotected.  It would additionally crush individual business owners’ guaranteed First Amendment rights.   

 NOTE: Rep. Blunt penned a column on the majority’s ENDA legislation this week for Human Events, available HERE. His speech on the floor of the House can be viewed on YouTube by clicking HERE. Call 202-225-6536 or go to his website HERE to thank Congressman Blunt for standing up for religious freedom and educating the nation on how ENDA will undermine it. If we had more Congressmen like Blunt, our freedoms would not be in jeopardy.

Majority’s ENDA Bill Takes Dead Aim at Religious Freedom

Legislation creates conflict between one’s right to religious freedom, and another’s right to sue you for exercising it

WASHINGTON – House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today after Democrats failed to secure a veto-proof majority on the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a bill that would erode one’s right to religious freedom by strengthening another’s right to sue you for practicing it:

“The structure of the bill before us today is eerily similar to legislation we’ve seen from this majority all year: a favorable, purposefully misleading title applied to a bill that’s poorly assembled and oblivious to its own consequences. 

“In this case, the so-called ‘Employment Non-Discrimination Act’ creates a legal quagmire for employees who practice, or even acknowledge, their religious beliefs – depending on where they happen to work, and subject to judicial interpretation. In the process, it erodes a basic, fundamental right bestowed upon us by our Creator – and a right guaranteed to every American under the U.S. Constitution.

“As a former president of a Baptist college in Missouri, supporters of this bill have been quick to assure me that its most onerous provisions would not apply to that school. But no such exemption is available for Christian bookstore owners, as an example, or any other small business in which people of faith and deep religious conviction are relied upon as an integral part of the workforce.

“Thankfully, Republicans secured the votes necessary this afternoon to uphold a presidential veto. It’s my hope now that this Congress can move forward on the real priorities affecting American families. Though a clear boon to trial lawyers, this bill does not meet that standard.”

NOTE: Rep. Blunt penned a column on the majority’s ENDA legislation this week for Human Events, available HERE. His speech on the floor of the House can be viewed on YouTube by clicking HERE.

Victim of harassment lawsuit tells his story

 Larry Cirignano (right) in courtroom with Michael Gilleran, the attorney who helped him beat bogus charges by ACLU activist Sarah Loy that he assaulted her after she disupted his pro-marriage rally. Click HERE for more on the case, and HERE to read about a Worcester, Mass. reporter who helped smear Cirignano but who refuses to recant his discredited story. For MassResistance’s comprehensive account of Cirignano’s trial and Sarah Loy’s fraud, click HERE.

By Larry Cirignano

This week we celebrate All Saints Day and All Souls Day.  The Catholic Church venerates saints as role models for all of us to emulate, and to encourage us to strive to defend our faith and principles as they did, despite each of them being a sinner.

In early American history, back in 1597, five Franciscan friars were martyred, in what is now Georgia, for standing up against polygamy and defending marriage.

In early church history St John the Baptist, St John Fisher and St Thomas More were all beheaded for standing up for marriage. 

If we are going to continue as a society, we need to stand up for marriage as these brave saints did, by promoting families raising children, and by protecting our children as our most precious resource.

The family is an essential building block for society.  Families are the first protectors of children as the first providers of food, shelter, health care and education. The home is the domestic church and serves as the first hospital, school and restaurant that most kids will know.