DiversityInc magazine co-founder Luke Visconti (lvisconti@diversityinc.com) showed his own (modern) bigotry and disrespect for people of faith by comparing Americans For Truth president Peter LaBarbera to a 19th Century Christian slavery advocate because LaBarbera opposes homosexuality and pro-homosexual corporate policies. The strongly pro-“gay” DiversityInc disinvited the AFTAH founder to a “Religion in the Workplace” panel discussion after pro-homosexual panelists threatened to boycott the discussion if LaBarbera was allowed to participate.

By Peter LaBarbera

Dear Christian or morality advocate who opposes homosexuality:

Did you know that in the eyes of some liberal, pro-homosexual advocates, you are the moral equivalent of the KKK? Actually, this is nothing new: radical “gay” activists have been making this absurd and hateful analogy for years. This is why I tell religious people all the time: disabuse yourself of the idea that homosexual activists and their liberal fellow travelers “respect” your faith or your right to live it out in the public square. They don’t; they despise your Bible-centered morality, and are quite willing to demonize you for it.

Increasingly, the liberals’ contempt for Christians and religious traditionalists is “out of the closet,” even as they continue with their hollow pleas for ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity.’

I sent the following note to DiversityInc Executive Editor Barbara Frankel, in response to a column by Luke Visconti, co-founder of DiversityInc, explaining why they were justified in disinviting me to their “Religion in the Workplace” panel discussion. Essentially Visconti’s argument is this: “There is no need to balance human rights,” especially since I [and by extension, other pro-family leaders opposed to homosexuality] am the moral equivalent of slavery advocates.

Frankel and DiversityInc did allow me a full-page column to express my disappointment with their decision to drop Americans For Truth from their panel (see below), to which Visconti was responding.

Visconti’s column cites a 19th Century pastor who used the Bible to justify slavery, and claimed that I am his modern-day equivalent. He also cites the Ku Klux, fascism and other evil or misguided causes which were defended by Christian leaders. (We apologize but the DiversityInc site is having problems so we are not able to provide excerpts of his column at this time.)

In response to my incredulous question to Ms. Frankel — “As an opponent of homosexuality, I am the moral equivalent of a slavery advocate?” — Visconti wrote me:

To answer your question: Yes.

There’s one point on which I agree with you: The discussion should have been in person. I appreciate you taking the offer of writing the column.

Here is my note to Frankel:

Barbara, so that’s it?… As an opponent of homosexuality, I am the moral equivalent of a slavery advocate? I shudder at the arrogance — and insulting bigotry — of your “white guy” founder, Luke Visconti [Visconti has a column in his magazine called, “Ask the White Guy”]. I suppose my African-American friends who agree with me on marriage and sexuality issues are also to be compared with slavery advocates?

‘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.

BOLDNESS: Courage; bravery; intrepidity; without timidity or fear; with confidence … 3. Freedom from timidity; liberty;
SODOMY: a crime against nature;
SODOMITE: … one guilty of sodomy
LIBERTY: … Religious liberty, is the free right of adopting and enjoying opinions on religious subjects, and of worshiping the Supreme Being according to the dictates of conscience, without external control.
— Definitions found in Noah Webster’s 1828 “American Dictionary of the English Language, republished by the Foundation for American Christian Education; Webster is regarded as the “Founding Father of American Scholarship and Education.”

 People like Yvette Schneider who overcame homosexuality through Christ call into question the idea of creating civil rights based on changeable “gayness,” so why are some Christians retreating in the battle against homosexual activism?

By Peter LaBarbera, www.americansfortruth.org

Bruce Thornton’s City Journal essay (excerpted at bottom), “Epistle to the Muslims: Christian Leaders Abase Themselves Before Islam,” is an excellent and highly informative piece on the battle between aggressive Islam and enfeebled, appeasing (small-‘c’) christianity.

In reading it, I cannot help but draw the parallels between that georeligious battle and modern Western Christians’ emasculated, guilt-ridden tone on homosexuality — even as homosexuals and their liberal allies move to indoctrinate young schoolchildren with their destructive ideology. Why are Christians and conservatives constantly apologizing for their past and current “sins” on homosexuality — as if WE are responsible for the transformation of a once-taboo perversion into a civil right? 

Why do we continue to promote the fiction that hordes of Christians “hate” homosexuals when the greater tendency (by far) among believers these days is apathy or, worse, to “tolerate” and even approve of changeable homosexual/gender BEHAVIORS when God doesn’t?

This terrific sentence from Thornton’s essay is directly applicable to America’s internal culture wars (dhimmis are non-Muslims living as second-class citizens in Islamic-conquered lands, allowed to practice their religion if they pay special taxes and acknowledge Muslim supremacy; emphasis added):

This appeasing tone of the traditional dhimmi — an unreciprocated solicitude typical of the inferior when dealing with his superior –– suggests once again that the West is spiritually dead, its Christian faith in the hands of those who will not defend it, even in print.

Repent America issued the following release November 15th:  

PENNSYLVANIA’S COMMONWEALTH COURT
STRIKES DOWN “HATE CRIMES” LAW EXPANSION

PHILADELPHIA – The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court in a 4-1 decision today struck down amendments to the state’s “hate crimes” law, declaring that the amendments enacted in 2002 were “unconstitutional and therefore null and void.” The ruling was a victory for Repent America (RA), a Christian evangelistic organization, several of whose members challenged amendments.

“Praise the Lord!” stated RA director Michael Marcavage upon hearing the decision. “This is a victory for constitutional government, so let us be thankful,” he concluded.

The legal challenge to the law, formally known as the Ethnic Intimidation Law, stemmed from the arrests of eleven Christians with RA, who became known as the Philadelphia 11, after they were jailed and charged under the amendments to the law while ministering the Gospel in 2004 at a publicly-funded homosexual event known as “OutFest”. The charges were all later dropped and/or dismissed as being without merit.

Seven defendants in the Philadelphia criminal cases subsequently filed an action in the Commonwealth Court challenging the process by which the amendments to the Ethnic Intimidation statute had been enacted. In particular, the petitioners asserted that the passage of the bill – which originally criminalized agricultural crop destruction but through amendment became the first statute in Pennsylvania history to recognize “sexual orientation” as a protected class – violated various sections of Article III of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Section 1 of Article III prohibits the changing of a bill in the course of its passage through the legislature such that its original purpose is changed. Section 3 of Article III requires that the subject matter of a bill be clearly expressed in its title.

The Court, finding sufficient basis to rule in the petitioners’ favor due to an alteration of purpose of the bill as expressed in its original text, declined to rule on the challenge brought under Article III, section 3. The amendments struck down today would have increased the penalties for various crimes committed with a malicious motivation based upon “actual or perceived . . . ancestry, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity.”

“The legislative process that led to the enactment of these amendments clearly violated Article III of the Pennsylvania Constitution,” stated Aaron Martin, attorney for the Repent America defendants. “The Court rightly found that there was no logical or legal connection between trampling down a hay field and assaulting someone on the basis of sexual orientation,” he concluded.

The Court’s majority opinion was authored by President Judge Emeritus James Gardner Collins, who was joined by Judges Doris A. Smth-Ribner, Dan Pellegrini and Robert Simpson. President Judge Bonnie B. Leadbetter dissented without opinion. The full text of the Court’s opinion can be found by clicking HERE.

‘Civil Unions’ is hardly an acceptable compromise 

By Peter LaBarbera 

The item at bottom was sent out Nov. 18 as a part of Family Research Council President Tony Perkins’ “Washington Update.” We agree with the sentiments, with a caveat regarding this line: “…force the state back into a bitter debate that many believed was solved by the legislature earlier this year.” This apparently refers to  the New Jersey legislature’s 2006 vote for homosexual “civil unions,” which was signed into law by Gov. John Corzine (D) last December and went into effect in February.

We are sure that by using the word “solved” Mr. Perkins does not mean to condone “civil unions” — which is merely “same-sex marriage” by another name. However, it is unfortunately the case that a significant minority of “conservatives,” including pro-life and pro-family advocates, now see “civil unions” as a way out of the homosexual “marriage” mess.

The gap between traditional marriage (i.e., normalcy) and “civil unions” is far wider than that between “civil unions” and “same-sex marriage” — a strategic reality of which the more savvy homosexual activists are well aware (even as the Gay Whining Machine complains about a lack of marital “equality”).

In fact, New Jersey’s “civil unions” law recognizes out-of-state “gay marriages.” It “seeks to give gay couples the same rights in the state as married couples,” reports the USA Today. How much clearer can you get than that on the effect of this “compromise”?

 LaBarbera asks: why so many boy victims of pedophilia?

 Nelson Garcia, “boy lover” and deceitful critic of AFTAH. The anti-pedophilia (yet pro-homosexuality) website Wikisposure redirected our link to their page exposing Garcia’s past.

Dear AFTAH Readers,

Wikisposure, a website set up by the Perverted-Justice.com to expose pedophiles, sadly has chosen to “redirect” its page on Nelson Garcia after Americans For Truth linked to it in an effort to document Garcia past as a “boy lover” and criminal arrested for possessing child pornography. Here is our point-by-point response to Wikisposure’s tendentious, pro-homosexuality post:

WIKISPOSURE WRITES: [Headline:] “Redirections”

This page is a special area set-up for redirections. Sometimes organizations and websites will try to co-opt our work to further whatever non-related cause they have.

AFTAH RESPONDS: Americans For Truth was not trying to “co-opt” anything. We merely linked to the best web resource available at the time for exposing Nelson Garcia’s pederastic, criminal past as a “boy lover.”

WIKISPOSURE CONTINUES: This page will be updated with link redirections that should help clarify things for all who come here.

[headline] Americans For Truth Redirection – November 2007
The anti-homosexual hate group “Americans for Truth” …

AFTAH RESPONDS: Wikisposure has obviously not done its research, thus exposes its particular biases and bigotry. Disagreement is not hate, and morality is not prejudice. AFTAH is indeed diametrically opposed to the political/cultural agendas of homosexual, bisexual and transgender activist groups; we think homosexual behavior is wrong, unnatural and changeable, and that nobody is innately “gay”; they think it is right and the basis for a healthy identity, and perhaps even marriage.

We do not “hate” people, but oppose behavior, and have many times stressed the need to reach out to homosexuals with the love of Christ. At our recent banquet, former lesbian Charlene Cothran did just that. As Christians, we are commanded to speak the truth “in love.” We have condemned anti-homosexual (including “Christian”) activists whose messages do not meet that standard. By classifying Americans For Truth as a “hate group,” Wikisposure unfortunately shows that it is willing to make its purpose (which we naively presumed to be merely exposing pedophiles) subservient to a larger, politically correct agenda that includes demonizing and stigmatizing people of faith who do not share their homosexuality-positive viewpoint. That’s too bad.

Labeling historic Judeo-Christian morality as “hate” and its defenders as “haters” is itself an act of profound bigotry. (And we must remind all concerned that many Americans who do not consider themselves religious still consider homosexual behavior to be immoral.) Our question to Wikisposure editors, and to all pro-homosexuality advocates, is this: can you disagree with homosexuality — or believe homosexual behavior is sinful — without being labeled as “haters”?  Do you “hate” Americans For Truth, or do you just disagree with us? If you do hate us, is that hate acceptable because it falls within the framework of your ideology?

WIKISPOSURE CONTINUES: … [Americans For Truth] recently attacked a Nelson Garcia who is profiled on our Wiki[1] [links to page which was the original target of the AFTAH story link on Garcia that was redirected; you may need to click another link to get to the original page]. Nelson Garcia is, of course, a dangerous pedophile activist. He should be exposed to his community and his credibility attacked, of course. He is not, by any means, profiled here because he is attracted to males. He is profiled here because he is attracted to underage minors. The reason “Americans for Truth” are attacking him isn’t because he’s a pedophile, but rather that he is attracted to males.

AFTAH RESPONDS: This is preposterous, and again shows Wikisposure’s unfortunate willingness to put politics above its noble mission of protecting children. AFTAH helped expose Nelson Garcia because Garcia has made it his mission to demonize us, while keeping his pederastic past hidden from the public. He was ripe for exposure, spewing all kinds of lies and hatred at Americans For Truth and other Christian groups and leaders opposed to homosexuality. Garcia — busted for possessing child pornography — has the audacity to smear AFTAH founder Peter LaBarbera as “Porno Pete” and another pro-family advocate — parental rights defender David Parker — as a “child abuser.” 

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.

Gary Morella sent the following letter to President Bush: 

November 8, 2007

Dear Mr. President:

ENDA [Employment Nondiscrimination Act, H.R. 3685] is horrendous legislation that must  be vetoed for the sake of the common good.  It was put forth for one reason, and one reason only, i.e., the advocacy of a social engineering agenda under force of law by a radical fringe who demand that society make them comfortable with their vices, which is counter to the aforementioned common good, as classically understood from the time of Aristotle’s Politics.  Any exemptions are illusions, as verified by what has been going on in Canada and Europe, especially the UK, when irrational legislation is made law. All one has to do is query those who were visited by the police for standing up for faith and right reason, which are married, not divorced!  Society is not obliged to codify law that makes aberrant behavior a civil right, which is insanity, and ultimately leads to anarchy! 

Moreover, we are talking proven changeable, aberrant behavior that is physically, psychologically, socially, and economically ruinous, not to mention the coercion of people of faith by its advocates, which is pure and simply, UN-AMERICAN, making a mockery of the sacrifices of all those who fought and died for our country in its history.   Rational societies are obliged to discriminate between right and wrong behavior; else, they cease being rational!  If responsible parents can understand this, why can’t responsible states? 

Accordingly, there is no choice here, Mr. President, for the sake of a world fit to live in for our children and grandchildren.  Please VETO ENDA for the common good which should be the primary goal of the state! 

Sincerely,
 
Gary L. Morella
Research Assistant
The Pennsylvania State University
P.O. Box 719
Lemont, PA  16851