| Home | About | Issues | Resources | Join Our Email List | Savage Hate | Donate | Contact |
New Resource: Gagnon Paper Warns that ENDA Will Erode Workplace Liberties
October 30th, 2007
Eastman Kodak Company now gives preferential treatment to homosexual-owned “minority” subcontractors, and proudly gives funds to the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network. (GLSEN sponsored the notorious “Fistgate” workshop in 2000 and promotes homosexuality- and transsexuality-affirming lessons for grade schoolers.) Would Kodak be emboldened under an ENDA law to restrict “anti-gay” discussions or speech among its employees?
Pittsburgh Theological Seminary Professor Rob Gagnon, author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice, examines the potential assaults on liberty if the ENDA bill (Employment Nondiscrimination Act, H.R. 3685) becomes law. Gagnon’s paper, “Don’t ENDAnger Your Liberties in the Workplace,” is a must read, as it delves into the potential reactions (and over-reactions) of corporation managers to a federal law that bans “discrimination” based on homosexuality (“sexual orientation”). Check out these scenarios offered by Gagnon:
- Suppose in the lunchroom or at the water cooler you engage in a conversation about sexual ethics. If a fellow employee extols homosexual bonds and you express your moral reservations about such bonds, you or the company could be liable for an anti-discrimination lawsuit for creating an intimidating atmosphere in the workplace that adversely affects the standing of a person who is vocal about his or her homosexual activity.
- Let’s say that, in response to “diversity” posters, you post on your cubicle the text of Rom 1:24-27. Or in response to a corporate directive that you participate supportively in a “Coming Out Day” you respectfully decline because you find homosexual practice to be morally offensive. Or in an attempt to get exempted from the email list of the company’s “GLBT” organization (gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender) you send an email requesting to be removed from the list because you think homosexual practice is immoral. In all these circumstances, you are far more likely to be disciplined or fired, and to have no legal redress, with an “ENDA” in place than without it.
- As a means of protecting the company against “discrimination” lawsuits, your employer may require you to attend indoctrination seminars that stress that homosexuality is as morally neutral as race or sex; and, moreover, to participate in “coming out” celebrations in the workplace that affirm “sexual diversity.” Your employer may further prohibit, under penalty of termination, any conversation, written communication, or act that calls homosexual practice into question.
- While homosexual and bisexual persons will have their jobs protected under this act, your job status and advancement will have no such protections if you manifest “discriminatory” words against homosexual behavior. Indeed, not only will your religious convictions not be protected in a secular workplace, but also they will be treated as “bigotry” akin to racism and sexism. Corporations don’t generally hire or promote bigots. It is not good for business.
- Monitoring of “discriminatory” beliefs toward homosexual and bisexual persons could even extend, at least in the case of white collar employees, outside the workplace. For example, if a school teacher has published in a newspaper a letter that advocates that society not provide legal incentives for homosexual practice, or offers counseling for those seeking to come out of the homosexual life, the courts could rule (as the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled a couple of years ago) that the employer is entitled to take such discriminatory views into consideration in suspending or firing the employee.
Gagnon’s entire paper can be viewed in HTML format HERE or as a PDF document HERE. Also see Americans For Truth’s special report on ENDA, “14 Good Reasons to Oppose H.R. 3685, the ‘ENDA Our Freedom” Bill.”
Catholic Men’s Group Calls on Archbishop Niederauer to Replace San Francisco Priest, Steve Meriwether
October 30th, 2007
Steve Meriwether of San Francisco’s pro-homosexual “Most Holy Redeemer” church.
This open letter below (emphasis added) was delivered to San Francisco Archbishop Niederauer on October 29.
It is a request to publicly excommunicate the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence and other similar groups and to remove the pastor of Most Holy Redeemer Parish, Fr. Steve Meriwether.
(If you’re not familiar with this event, please take a few minutes to check these links: http://americansfortruth.com/news/more-san-francisco-nuttiness-catholic-archbishop-gives-communion-to-sisters-of-perpetual-indulgence.html (Americans For Truth was the first to report that Archbishop Niederauer gave Communion to members of the blasphemous, drag-queen-“nuns” group, Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence; he later apologized);
http://www.qdomine.com/Morality_pages/MHR.htm and http://romancatholicblog.typepad.com/roman_catholic_blog/2007/10/bill-oreilly-di.html
or Google “Niederauer Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” or “Niederauer homosexual” for pages and pages of documents, photographs, videos, interviews and commentary about this event that occurred 3 weeks ago and is STILL being reported on from Canada to Germany. The latest: an interview with an openly “gay” member of Most Holy Redeemer Parish Council with other historical facts here:
http://www.tfp.org/TFPForum/TFPCommentary/san_francisco_article.htm
Please call the archbishop’s office (don’t talk to a voicemail – make your request to a human). Fax and email them asking the archbishop to excommunicate these groups and their members and to replace Fr. Steve Meriwether as pastor:
Contact info here:
Phone: Chancery Office: 415 614 5500
Lori Miller, Secretary; John North, Pastoral Ministry xt 5504; Barbara Lordi, Pastoral Outreach ext. 5506 and Maury Healy, Dir. of Communications.
email : (with a personal note)
info@sfarchdiocese.org
Also fax to: 415 565 3679
Please consider forwarding to the nuncio at nuntiususa@nuntiususa.org, and Pope Benedict XVI at benedictxvi@vatican.va
____________________________
Open Letter delivered to the archbishop, Oct 29, 2007
St. Joseph’s Men Society
15732 Los Gatos Blvd. #303, Los Gatos, California 95032
October 29, 2007
Most Reverend George H. Niederauer
Archbishop of San Francisco
One Peter Yorke Way
San Francisco, CA 94109-6602
Your Excellency:
During your first visit to Most Holy Redeemer parish on Sunday October 7th, 2007, you gave Our Lord in Holy Communion to members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (SPI) a homosexual activist group widely known for its attacks upon and mockery of the Catholic Faith. Your subsequent October 11th apology notes that you did not recognize these “strangely dressed persons” as members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence and that these individuals should not have received Holy Communion, nor should the minister of the Church administer the Sacrament to them.
First: For the sake of their souls and the souls of those Catholics worldwide who have been scandalized, your office requires you to state this formally, according to the teachings of the Church.
Read the rest of this article »
MSNBC’s Dan Abrams Embarrasses Self in Interview with Bob Knight
October 30th, 2007
MSNBC’s Dan Abrams recently sought to make a fool of Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Media Institute, in an interview about Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling’s “outing” of the beloved Dumbledore character. But Abrams’ overwrought attempt to mock Knight backfired, with Abrams himself looking like the fool. It’s painful, but click HERE to listen to the segment. You can also watch it by going to the homosexual website Queerty (WARNING: vulgar language: on many “queer” and lefty websites, commenters can’t seem to make a point without cussing or alluding to sex or male anatomy).
We commend Knight (my former boss) for keeping his composure: how many of us could calmly withstand the over-the-top pummeling from the smug (and very unfunny) Abrams like Bob did on this broadcast? We don’t know about “homophobia,” but it seems more and more liberals are coming out as “homo-snobs”: those so committed to supporting all things “gay” that they won’t acknowledge that there are any rational arguments against homosexuality. (And of course there is no need to marshal arguments to defend homosexuality since that is self-evidently “true.”) To the committed homo-snob, any attempt to defend traditional sexual mores or protect children from moral corruption is just a big joke. — Peter LaBarbera
LaBarbera Commends Gary Glenn’s Statement on Fred Phelps’ Twisted ‘God Hates Fags’ Message, Awful Military Funeral Protests
October 30th, 2007
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].)
Read the rest of this article »
TVC: Pelosi Delays ENDA Vote Yet Again
October 29th, 2007From Traditional Values Coalition’s website. TVC has led the charge against ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, on Capitol Hill:
October 26, 2007 – Shortly after the White House issued a veto threat on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) announced she was delaying a vote on ENDA.
Pelosi is delaying the vote because Democrat leaders can’t find enough votes for passage of ENDA with “gender identity” added back into it. However, this supposed delay may only be a strategic move to undermine organized opposition to ENDA.
HIV/AIDS: Anybody Can Get It?
October 29th, 2007
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.
Read the rest of this article »
Worcester Telegram Reporter Richard Nangle ‘Stands By’ Story Echoing ACLU Activist Sarah Loy’s Lie Against Larry Cirignano Rejected by Jury
October 26th, 2007
This photo of ACLU activist (or should we say actress?) Sarah Loy crying at the rally where she falsely accused pro-family advocate Larry Cirignano of violently assaulting her, appeared in the December 17, 2007, Worcester Telegram and Gazette’s initial report of the incident. Telegram Reporter Richard Nangle (rnangle@telegram.com) wrote that Cirignano “pushed [Loy] to the ground, her head slamming against the concrete sidewalk.” But a jury rejected this story, which echoed Loy’s account. (The jury found that Loy tripped rather than being pushed.) Nangle, testifying in court, could not find himself among enlarged photos of people at the center of the rally crowd — casting into doubt whether he could have seen what actually transpired. Nevertheless, a defiant Nangle says he “stands by everything” that he originally reported. Telegram photo is by Paul Kapteyn.
By Peter LaBarbera
This is a fascinating case involving media bias: a reporter whose story was proven false — or at least not credible — in a court of law is “stand[ing] by everything ” he originally wrote.
On December 16, 2006, the Worcester Telegram and Gazette published a story under reporter Richard Nangle’s byline, regarding a pro-marriage rally in Worcester protested by Sarah Loy and the local ACLU. Nangle, an ACLU Board Member, reported that Catholic family advocate Larry Cirignano had “pushed [Loy] to the ground, her head slamming against the concrete sidewalk.”
Nangle’s vivid depiction of the alleged attack echoed Loy’s own charges of assault and battery against Cirignano, and helped created an impression in the public’s mind that she was a victim of violence (and that he was violent man who attacks women). A photo accompanying Nangle’s story (see above) showed Loy in tears at the rally scene. However, on October 22, a jury found Larry Cirignano innocent of assault and battery against Loy, a week after presiding Judge David Despotopulos had thrown out Loy’s “civil rights” complaint against him. See our story relaying MassRessistance’s account of the case and trial.
Here are the first three paragraphs in Nangle’s story, under the headline (which he did not necessarily write), “Worcester Rally Takes Ugly Turn; Gay Marriage Backer Pushed,” with emphasis added:
WORCESTER- Tempers boiled over at an anti-gay marriage rally yesterday when the executive director of the Boston-based Catholic Citizenship emerged from behind a lectern outside City Hall, rushed toward a female counter-demonstrator, and pushed her to the ground.
Sarah Loy, 27, of Worcester was holding a sign in defense of same-sex marriage amid a sea of green “Let the People Vote” signs when Larry Cirignano of Canton, who heads the Catholic Citizenship group, ran into the crowd, grabbed her by both shoulders and told her, “You need to get out. You need to get out of here right now.” Mr. Cirignano then pushed her to the ground, her head slamming against the concrete sidewalk.
“It was definitely assault and battery,” said Ronal C. Madnick, director of the Worcester County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts. Police interviewed Mr. Madnick and several others moments after the incident.
Read the rest of this article »
Scott Lively: Is Hating ‘Haters’ Hateful? Can You Oppose Homosexuality without Being a ‘Homophobe’?
October 26th, 2007This is a wonderful piece by Scott Lively, founder of Abiding Truth Ministries and Defend the Family International, and one of the early pro-family leaders opposing the homosexual activist agenda. — Peter LaBarbera
By Scott Lively
Hate has a pretty bad name in the world today. No one wants to be called a hater, especially Christians, which is probably why we get accused of it all the time by our opponents. Homosexuals are especially fond of calling people haters. They even invented the word homophobia, which means hate and fear of homosexuals, envisaged as a mental illness (a phobia is an anxiety disorder).
I hate being called a homophobe. It has such an ugly connotation. Its especially unpleasant because, as a Christian, I’m supposed to have a reputation for loving people, not hating them. So I’ve worked really hard over the years to try to get the homosexuals to stop calling me a homophobe.
I’ve pointed out the difference between hating people and hating their behavior (loving the sinner but hating the sin). They hated that. Then I tried “walking my talk” by taking an ex-“gay” man who was dying of AIDS into my family. My wife and I and our children loved and cared for him during the last year of his life. They hated that even more.
Then I began asking for guidance from homosexuals themselves: “Tell me, where is the line between homophobia and acceptable opposition to homosexuality?” I asked. “What if I just agree with the Bible that homosexuality is a sin no worse than any other sex outside of marriage?”
“No, that’s homophobic,” they replied. “Suppose I talk only about the proven medical hazards of gay sex and try to discourage people from hurting themselves?” “No, you can’t do that,” they said. “How about if I say that homosexuals have the option to change if they choose?” “Ridiculous” they answered. “Maybe I could just be completely positive, say nothing about homosexuality, and focus only on promoting the natural family and traditional marriage?” “That’s really hateful,” they replied.
After I while, I realized that the only way I could get them to stop calling me a homophobe was to start agreeing with them about everything. But here’s my dilemma: I honestly believe the Bible which says that homosexuality is wrong and harmful and that all sex belongs within marriage. I’ve also read the professional studies and know that “gay” sex hurts people because it goes against the design of their bodies. And I’m friends with a number of former homosexuals who are now married and living heterosexual lives. Do I have to give up my religion? Ignore scientific facts? Betray my friends? Is that the only way to avoid being called a hater and a homophobe?
There’s no escape. A homophobe is anyone who, for any reason, disapproves of homosexuality in any way, shape, manner, form or degree. This leaves me with just two choices: agree that everything about homosexuality is natural, normal, healthy, moral and worthy to be celebrated OR be labeled as a mentally ill, hate-filled bigot.
Am I wrong? Is there any way to openly disapprove of homosexuality without being a homophobe? “Gay” leaders, please set me straight on this.
Because if I’m right, that means the “gay agenda” is to stop everyone from following the Bible regarding sexual matters. It is, after all, their stated goal to “stamp out homophobia.” No more religious freedom. It’s also to suppress scientific research that has reached conclusions they don’t like, especially if it helps people to change their homosexual orientation back to a heterosexual one (ask the doctors and scientists at narth.com what they’ve had to endure). If it discourages homosexuality, even by implication, it’s homophobic and can’t be used.
There’s a queer reasoning behind all of this. Homosexuals call me names like bigot and homophobe, condemn my religion, mock my rational conclusions about social issues, impugn my motives, display intense hostility toward my actions, and curse my very existence, all under the justification that I’m a “hater.” But if I’m a “hater” for civilly opposing what they do, why aren’t they haters for uncivilly opposing what I do? Such a double standard, in the context of a public debate on “civil rights,” is not just hypocritical, it is surreal.
I admit I have some hate. I hate watching people kill themselves with preventable diseases like AIDS. I hate seeing children being steered toward unhealthy lifestyles. I hate having my pro-family views distorted by dishonest journalists, politicians and academics. And I hate seeing my God being treated like a homophobe for what He teaches in His Bible.
So if you’re not going to stop calling me a “hater” for wanting homosexuals to be saved and healed, or for opposing their political agenda, let’s at least see a little more of that famous “American sense of fair play” in the public debate on this issue. Hatred of “haters” is hateful too.
Scott Lively, J.D., Th.D.
Defend the Family International
PO Box 891023
Temecula, CA 92589
www.defendthefamily.com
Center For Morality
2783 Martin Rd.
#327
Dublin, OH 43017
