Thank President Bush for His Veto Pledge on ‘Hate Crimes’

May 3rd, 2007

george-w-bush-picture.jpgSome bad news and some good news. The “Thought Crimes” bill, H.R. 1592, passed the House of Representatives yesterday 237-180, but the White House issued a strong statement against it indicating a likely presidential veto of the bill. Your calls to the White House made a difference! (AFTAH and then CWA led the way in publicly calling on President Bush to clarify his stance on Hate Crimes.)

Now we need to keep calling the White House to urge a similar promise to veto the “ENDA Our Freedom” bill (Employment Nondiscrimination Act) — which would force religious business owners with 15 or more employees to violate their conscience to accommodate homosexual and “transgender” agendas in the workplace. For talking points against ENDA, click HERE.

TAKE ACTION: Call the White House and thank the President for his clear statement (below, or on PDF on the White House website HERE) on “Hate Crimes,” and urge him to do the same against the freedom-crushing ENDA. Call the White House at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111, or write president@whitehouse.gov (the online comment page is HERE).

Also, call your U.S. Senators on the “Thought Crimes bill,” H.R. 1592, at 202-224-3121 or by going to http://www.congress.org/. Re: ENDA, you will need to call BOTH your Senators and your U.S. Representative, since ENDA hasn’t been voted on in either chamber.

Click HERE for a roll call of the House vote on H.R. 1592 (212 Democrats and 25 Republicans voted for it). The following is the White House statement on H.R. 1592 [emphasis in bold added]:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
May 3, 2007 (House)

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

 

H.R. 1592 – Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007
(Rep. Conyers (D) Michigan and 171 cosponsors)

 

The Administration favors strong criminal penalties for violent crime, including crime based on personal characteristics, such as race, color, religion, or national origin. However, the Administration believes that H.R. 1592 is unnecessary and constitutionally questionable. If H.R. 1592 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.

 

State and local criminal laws already provide criminal penalties for the violence addressed by the new Federal crime defined in section 7 of H.R. 1592, and many of these laws carry stricter penalties (including mandatory minimums and the death penalty) than the proposed language in H.R. 1592. State and local law enforcement agencies and courts have the capability to enforce those penalties and are doing so effectively. There has been no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement, and doing so is inconsistent with the proper allocation of criminal enforcement responsibilities between the different levels of government. In addition, almost every State in the country can actively prosecute hate crimes under the State’s own hate crimes law.

 

H.R. 1592 prohibits willfully causing or attempting to cause bodily injury to any person based upon the victim’s race, color, religion, or national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The Administration notes that the bill would leave other classes (such as the elderly, members of the military, police officers, and victims of prior crimes) without similar special status. The Administration believes that all violent crimes are unacceptable, regardless of the victims, and should be punished firmly.

 

Moreover, the bill’s proposed section 249(a)(1) of title 18 of the U.S. Code raises constitutional concerns. Federalization of criminal law concerning the violence prohibited by the bill would be constitutional only if done in the implementation of a power granted to the Federal government, such as the power to protect Federal personnel, to regulate interstate commerce, or to enforce equal protection of the laws. Section 249(a)(1) is not by its terms limited to the exercise of such a power, and it is not at all clear that sufficient factual or legal grounds exist to uphold this provision of H.R. 1592.

Jacoby: Lawful Incest Might be on the Way

May 3rd, 2007

The “gay” lobby has pried open a legal Pandora’s Box, that’s for sure. Once you “mainstream” one particular deviance, it’s very hard to keep the rest from asserting their “rights.” For years, homosexuality advocates mocked “slippery slope” arguments — hey, whatever it takes to achieve the Sexual Revolution, right? Now it turns out the pro-family conservatives were right. When even Time magazine concedes we’re in trouble, you know it’s bad.–Peter LaBarbera

LAWFUL INCEST MAY BE ON THE WAY
By Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, May 2, 2007

(Link to article on Boston Globe website)

When the BBC invited me onto one of its talk shows recently to discuss the day’s hot topic — legalizing adult incest — I thought of Rick Santorum.

Back in 2003, as the Supreme Court was preparing to rule in Lawrence v. Texas, a case challenging the constitutionality of laws criminalizing homosexual sodomy, then-Senator Santorum caught holy hell for warning that if the law were struck down, there would be no avoiding the slippery slope.

“If the Supreme Court says you have the right to consensual sex within your home,” he told a reporter, “then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.”

It was a commonsensical observation, though you wouldn’t have known it from the nail-spitting it triggered in some quarters. When the justices, voting 6-3, did in fact declare it unconstitutional for any state to punish consensual gay sex, the dissenters echoed Santorum’s point. “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are . . . called into question by today’s decision,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the minority. That opinion too was scorned by the politically correct. But now Time magazine acknowledges: “It turns out the critics were right.”

Time’s attention, like the BBC’s, has been caught by the legal battles underway to decriminalize incest between consenting adults. An article last month by Time reporter Michael Lindenberger titled “Should Incest Be Legal?” highlights the case of Paul Lowe, an Ohio man convicted of incest for having sex with his 22-year-old stepdaughter. Lowe has appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court, making Lawrence the basis of his argument. In Lawrence , the court had ruled that people “are entitled to respect for their private lives” and that under the 14th Amendment, “the state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.” If that was true for the adult homosexual behavior in Lawrence , why not for the adult incestuous behavior in the Ohio case?

The BBC program focused on the case of Patrick and Susan Stubing, a German brother and sister who live as a couple and have had four children together. Incest is a criminal offense in Germany , and Patrick has already spent more than two years in prison for having sex with his sister. The two of them are asking Germany ‘s highest court to abolish the law that makes incest illegal.

“Many people see it as a crime, but we’ve done nothing wrong,” Patrick told the BBC. “We are like normal lovers. We want to have a family.” They dismiss the conventional argument that incest should be banned because the children of close relatives have a higher risk of genetic defects. After all, they point out, other couples with known genetic risks aren’t punished for having sex. In any event, Patrick has had himself sterilized so that he cannot father any more children.

Some years back, I’d written about a similar case in Wisconsin — that of Allen and Patricia Muth, a brother and sister who fell in love as adults, had several children together, and were prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned as a result. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence , they appealed their conviction to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, where they lost. Lowe will probably lose too.

But the next Lowe or Muth to come along, or the one after that, may not lose. In Lawrence , it is worth remembering, the Supreme Court didn’t just invalidate all state laws making homosexual sodomy a crime. It also overruled its own decision just 17 years earlier (Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986) upholding such laws. If the court meant what it said in Lawrence — that states are barred from “making . . . private sexual conduct a crime” — it will not take that long for laws criminalizing incest to go by the board as well. Impossible? Outlandish? That’s what they used to say about normalizing homosexuality and legalizing same-sex [“marriage.”]

Parts of Europe are already heading down this road. In Germany , the Green Party is openly supporting the Stubings in their bid to decriminalize incest. “We must abolish a law that originated last century and today is useless,” party spokesman Jerzy Montag says. Incest is no longer a criminal offense in Belgium , Holland , and France . According to the BBC, Sweden even permits half-siblings to marry.

Your reaction to the prospect of lawful incest may be “Ugh, gross.” But personal repugnance is no replacement for moral standards. For more than 3,000 years, a code of conduct stretching back to Sinai has kept incest unconditionally beyond the pale. If sexual morality is jettisoned as a legitimate basis for legislation, personal opinion and cultural fashion are all that will remain. “Should Incest Be Legal?” Time asks. Over time, expect more and more people to answer yes.

European Parliament Condemns Poland for ‘Homophobia’ — Because Prime Minister Wants to Protect Children

May 3rd, 2007

We share Austin Ruse’s outrage at the arrogance of the European Parliament for re-defining Judeo-Christian morality in Poland as “homophobia.” Regarding pedophiles marching in the streets, the notorious NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) once marched in homosexual “pride” parades until “gay” organizers got smart and started banning the pederasty group. However, one “father of gay rights,” Harry Hay, avidly defended NAMBLA, and protested the man-boy-sex group’s exclusion from the 1986 Los Angeles “gay pride” parade, holding a sign that read, “NAMBLA walks with me.” In 2005, ex-gay Christian activist James Hartline made headlines when he revealed that two convicted pedophiles were were working as volunteers for San Diego’s homosexual “pride” festival. Please help Poland by signing C-FAM’s petition.– Peter LaBarbera  

Dear Colleague,

The power of the radical homosexual movement in Europe has just been shown. The European Parliament just voted to condemn Poland on what they term “homophobia.” What was Poland’s crime? The Polish Prime Minister said that Polish school children should not be subject to “homosexual propaganda.”

Polish authorities have also resisted demands from radical homosexuals that they be allowed to march in the streets. If you live in any major city you know these marches where leather boys and pedophiles march freely and disruptively through the streets.

The response of the European Parliament was to pass a resolution calling these sensible actions “hate speech” and asks competent legal authorities to take action against these officials and the government of Poland.

This is outrageous and all people of good will must stand with the Polish people against the radical homosexual movement in the European Union.

I ask you to go immediately to the petition “Homosexual Hands Off Poland” at www.c-fam.org/handsoffpoland.php.

The petitions will be delivered to the Polish authorities on Thursday, May 10. I will personally deliver them to Polish Members of the European Parliament and to members of the Polish government when I am in Warsaw for the World Congress of Families.

We only have a few days to get as many names as possible. I urge you to go to www.c-fam.org/handsoffpoland.php and sign the petition, then send this message to everyone you know. We need to deliver thousands of names of supporters from all over the world. I especially urge those in the EU countries to get this message to everyone you know. We must tell the radicals in the European Union to keep homosexual hands off of Poland!

Go to www.c-fam.org/handsoffpoland.php and sign the petition and send this email message to everyone in your address book.

Yours sincerely,

Austin Ruse
President
C-FAM

PS Poland stands almost alone in the European Parliament against an enormous coalition of radicals. Poland needs our help right now. Please sign the petition at www.c-fam.org/handsoffpoland.php and help Poland fight back.
 
 

Where Is President Bush on ‘Thought Crimes’ and ENDA?

May 1st, 2007

We echo CWA’s call below for President Bush to use his bully pulpit to veto the “Thought Crimes” bill (H.R. 1592) —  and also ENDA, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, recently introduced in the House by homosexual Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). We’re counting on Mr. Bush to veto these pro-homosexual-activist bills, but the word we’re hearing from leaders in Washington is that the White House has still given no indication of where the President stands on either bill. Bush has only exercised a single veto, against Embryonic Stem Cell research, but he did promise that veto before the bill was passed.

How tragic it would be if the same president who committed American soldiers to fight and die to expand freedom in Iraq were to sign a bill that laid the foundation for restricting the “freedom to be moral” at home. That’s what these bills are all about. Otherwise, as my friend Matt Barber says, the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee would have adopted the proposed amendment to protect moral religious expression. There is no rash of anti-gay murders, nor are homosexuals having a problem getting jobs (although Barber got fired from Allstate for OPPOSING homosexuality on his own time!), so this is really about getting the heavy hand of the federal government involved in promoting homosexuality and gender confusion (“sexual orientation” and “gender identity”) as a “civil right.” And for the record, we at American For Truth oppose ALL “hate crimes” laws, not just those incorporating “sexual orientation.”– Peter LaBarbera

TAKE ACTION:  TAKE ACTION:  A House vote on “Hate Crimes” could come as early as Thursday.  Call the White House today at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111 and urge President Bush to veto the “Thought Crimes” bill, H.R. 1592, and ENDA (the pro-homosexual, pro-transgender Employment Nondiscrimination Act)  if they pass.  Ask the president to use his bully pulpit — like he did  in promising to veto the Embryonic Stem Cell bill — against both the “Hate Crimes” and ENDA bills. You can e-mail President Bush at president@whitehouse.gov or by using the White House Contact Page.  

Also, contact your U.S. Congressman and Senators through the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or through Congress.org. 

_____________________________ 

CWA Asks President for Veto Pledge on ‘Hate Crimes’ Legislation 

Washington, D.C. ––  In a recent letter to President Bush, Concerned Women for America (CWA) asked the President to veto H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, should it gain congressional approval. 

Congress appears poised to pass H.R. 1592 as early as Thursday.  This bill would grant individuals who engage in homosexual behavior (“sexual orientation”) or those who cross-dress (“gender identity”) preferential treatment over other citizens by elevating them to a specially protected class of victim. 

The 14th Amendment guarantees all citizens equal protection under the law, regardless of their chosen sexual behaviors.  There is no evidence to suggest that homosexuals or cross-dressers do not receive equal protection under the law.     

CWA President Wendy Wright pointed out, “Justice should be blind.  Matthew Shepherd’s assailants received the same sentence as Mary Stachowicz’s, a grandmother who was brutally murdered by a homosexual man.  Victims are — and should be — treated equally in the justice system, regardless of their ‘sexual orientation.’  This ‘hate crimes’ bill would overturn this balance, creating second-class victims and a federal justice system that discriminates against grandmothers, children, women and men simply because they are heterosexual.  We cannot imagine that President Bush would sign a bill that would create a two-tiered justice system that discriminates against grandmothers.”

Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, noted, “Attempts by Republicans to make this legislation more inclusive by adding additional classes of citizens such as children, members of the military, the elderly or the homeless were refused by congressional liberals in committee last week.  That refusal underscores the exclusionary and discriminatory nature of this bill.  H.R. 1592 unequivocally treats one class of citizens preferentially over others.  

“Perhaps most frightening is the fact that liberal legislators have refused any amendment which would substantively protect religious expression in association with this legislation.  Similar laws have been used around the world — and right here at home — to silence opposition to the homosexual lifestyle.  That refusal speaks volumes about the true agenda behind this legislation, which is to grant official government recognition to both homosexual and cross-dressing behaviors, and to silence opposition to those behaviors,” concluded Barber.     

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.

 

Colson on the Thought Police: What the Orwellian Hate Crimes Law Would Do

May 1st, 2007

By Chuck Colson, a Breakpoint Commentary

For further resources on this issue, go to the Breakpoint website. We encourage you to sign up for these excellent daily commentaries by e-mail.

In George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, the government Thought Police constantly spies on citizens to make sure they are not thinking rebellious thoughts. Thought crimes are severely punished by Big Brother.

1984 was intended as a warning against totalitarian governments that enslave and control their citizens. Never have we needed this warning more urgently than now, because America’s Thought Police are knocking on your door.

Last week the House Judiciary Committee, egged on by radical homosexual groups, passed what can only be called a Thought Crimes bill. It’s called the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But this bill is not about hate. It’s not even about crime. It’s about outlawing peaceful speech—speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong.

Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property. Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals—far less than even 1 percent.

Another problem is that in places where hate crimes laws have been passed, hate crimes have been defined to include verbal attacks—and even peaceful speech. The Thought Police have already prosecuted Christians under hate crimes laws in England, Sweden, Canada, and even in some places in the United States.

If this dangerous law passes, pastors who preach sermons giving the biblical view of homosexuality could be prosecuted. Christian businessmen who refuse to print pro-gay literature could be prosecuted. Groups like Exodus International, which offer therapy to those with unwanted same-sex attraction, could be shut down.

In classic 1984 fashion, peaceful speech will be redefined as a violent attack worthy of punishment.

This is the unspoken goal of activist groups. We know this because during the debate over the bill last week, Congressman Mike Pence (R) of Indiana offered a Freedom of Religion amendment to this hate crimes bill. It asked that nothing in this law limit the religious freedom of any person or group under the Constitution. The committee refused to adopt it. It also refused to adopt amendments protecting other groups from hate crimes—like members of the military, who are often targets of verbal attacks and spitting. They also shot down amendments that would protect the homeless and senior citizens, also often targeted by criminals. Nothing doing, the committee said—the only group they wanted to protect: homosexuals.

Clearly, the intent of this law is not to prevent crime, but to shut down freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought. Its passage would strike at the very heart of our democracy.

The full Congress may vote on this bill as early as this week. Unless you want Big Brother telling you what to say, what to think, and what to believe, I urge you to contact your congressman immediately, urging him or her to vote against this bill. If you visit the BreakPoint website, you’ll find more information about this radical law.

If we do nothing, 1984 will no longer be fiction, and Big Brother will be watching you and me—ready to punish the “wrong” thoughts.

TVC Report on ‘Hate Crimes’ Hearing: Religious Protection Amendment Rejected

April 30th, 2007

“A Terribly Sad Day for Christians in America”: Traditional Values Coalition

The following is Traditional Values Coalition’s firsthand report from last week’s House Judiciary Committee hearing on the “Thought Crimes” bill, H.R. 1592 (the bill’s is benignly called the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act”). Please note the portions in bold below:  

TVC REPORT FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING ON THE “HATE CRIMES” BILL, H.R. 1592

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

For almost 11 hours Rev. Lou Sheldon, Chairman of Traditional Values Coalition, and CEO Andrea Lafferty monitored every move in the Judiciary Committee relevant to the HR 1592, the Hate Crimes bill.  They sat in the front row from early morning until it was concluded around 9:15 p.m. All 25 Republican amendments were defeated.  The purpose of the Markup is to vote on amendments to the bill.  There are 23 Democrats and 17 Republicans [in the Judiciary Committee].  HR 1592 passed by a party line vote, all Democrats supported it and all Republicans opposed.  Following is TVC’s account of the “Markup.”

TVC materials were used by numerous Congressmen in their presentations.  It was clear that they were quoting from documents TVC had produced.  Numerous Congressmen came over to us and thanked us for staying there all day and all night. 

The TVC staff worked diligently researching, creating reports, meeting with Members and their staff, contacting you the grassroots for help and MUCH MORE.

The first Republican amendment was proposed by Congressman Jim Jordon from Ohio adding those unborn babies and those partially-born babies to the list of protected classes.  However, Chairman Conyers ruled the amendment was non-germane, which means the members were not allowed to vote on it. 

Congressman Darrell Issa, Republican from California offered a clarifying amendment concerning unborn babies which failed.

Republican Congressman Dan Lungren from California stating that no where in the bill are the terms “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” definition and he asked for a definition.   The democrats referred to what they said was an accepted definition of sexual orientation, heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual.  The republicans did not agree stating that heterosexuality was not an orientation.

The democrats did not want to discuss a definition of even sexual orientation or have it in the bill.  They wanted no definitions.

Friends, it was obvious.  There are many additional orientations that would have had to be included in sexual orientation.  Also, they would have to agree to a definition of gender identity and they did not want that.  They obviously did not want to define gender identity to include she-male, cross-dresser, drag queen, transgender, transsexual, etc.

Republican Congressman Randy Forbes from Virginia stated that since it has been proven and established that our military are targets of hate and physical attack, many facilities are recommending that soldiers not wear their uniforms in large adjoining cities.  He mentioned several groups by name that are vehemently spitting on them and abusing them, only because they are US military personnel.

So Forbes offered an amendment to also include military personnel as a protected class and thus to attack them would also be a hate crime.  It was defeated.

The Republicans offered many good amendments to add categories that would be covered by the bill.  They did a very good job trying to clarify the bill and hold the democrats accountable.

Senior Citizens should be a protected class as old people are being beaten up and robbed. Rosa Parks got mugged in Detroit.  Another suggested protected class was Pregnant Women who are battered by boy friends, live-in boyfriends or husbands because they are pregnant. Republican Congressman Tom Feeney of Florida offered an amendment to add the “homeless.”   All were defeated.

Republican Congressman Louis Gohmert of Texas moved to remove “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” from the bill.  It failed on a recorded vote of 19 to 13.

Congressman Mike Pence from Indiana offered the important amendment on Freedom of Religion.  “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.”

A number of Republicans spoke in support of it.  But the Democrats Jerrold Nadler, Tammy Baldwin and Chairman John Conyers kept evading the issue.

Finally, Congressman Gohmert asked, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?”

Gohmert was attempting to clarify and emphasize that the legislation would have an effect on the constitutional right to religious freedom and thus the Pence amendment was needed to protect religious speech.

The Democrats continued to explain why they could not accept the amendment.  Lundgren continuously shot down their answer.  He said, “What is your answer?  Would there be incitement charges against the pastor?”

And finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.”

Friends, that is what we have been warning you about and our legal advice was correct.  It is evident what HR 1592 is about.  It is not about homosexuals and cross dressers suffering with no food, shelter or jobs, it is about preventing Bible-believing people and pastors from speaking the truth. 

It is about punishing them so they will not dare to speak the truth.

It is about threatening them with prison so they won’t dare speak the truth.

The Judiciary Committee could easily have accepted the amendment, “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.” 

Rev. Lou Sheldon stated, “By refusing to accept this amendment the Democrats on this committee have proven their purpose, to remove freedom of religion from the U.S. Constitution.”

This is an up-to-the minute report late tonight.   

Tomorrow we will send you more news and an Action item so you can write your elected officials.  THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER YET.  HR 1592 WILL GO TO THE HOUSE FLOOR, VERY LIKELY EARLY NEXT WEEK.

Your financial help is urgently needed as we work to defeat HR 1592 on the House floor and continue to uphold and protect Biblical principles here at the Congress.  TVC can be reached at http://www.traditionalvalues.org/ or by calling 202-547-8570.

Scottish Christian Party Sends Out Two Million Anti-‘Sexual Orientation Regulations’ Leaflets

April 30th, 2007

Scottish Christian Party to make Holyrood election a referendum on the Sexual Orientation Regulation

GLASGOW, Scotland, April 30 /Christian Newswire/ — With the Sexual Orientation Regulations becoming law at midnight last night the Scottish Christian Party has mailed 2 million anti- Sexual Orientation Regulation leaflets to voters in Scotland.

In the Glasgow and the Central region of Scotland ¾ million leaflets have been sent in personally addressed envelopes with a covering letter.

Reverend George Hargreaves, leader of the Scottish Christian Party said, “We intend to high-jack the political agenda as far Christians are concerned. The SOR’s are a far more urgent matter to many Scottish Christians than independence or any other current political issue. It is an assault on their faith and conscience.

Thursday is their chance to say ‘No!’ to the SORs.”

In the party’s election broadcast, aired on BBC and STV last Tuesday, the SORs were compared to anti- Semitic laws passed by the Nazis in the early 1930’s. The broadcast featured footage of Hitler addressing a rally in 1933.

Reverend Hargreaves noted, “We are turning the Holyrood elections into a de-facto referendum on the Sexual Orientation Regulations.”

Note to Editors: In 2000 Brian Souter’s Keep the Clause campaign gained the support of over 1 million Scots. The Scottish Christian Party are fielding 72 candidates across Scotland on the Regional List; more than any other political party.

It’s Elementary: If Every Parent Were to See this Video, the ‘Gay’ Agenda Would Be Crippled

April 28th, 2007

By Peter LaBarbera

head_itselementary_01.gif Thanks to the technological wonder of YouTube (online digital videos), thousands of people across the world got a rare inside look at how pro-homosexual teachers and administrators indoctrinate very young children. Funny thing — and it’s the only funny thing about this story — is that the video clips in question are more than 10 years old. They come from an activist film called “It’s Elementary” made in 1996 by the San Francisco-based group Women’s Educational Media, which has been using this film and others to promote pro-homosexual teachings to young children in schools across the nation.

These video clips, posted by a racist and since taken down by YouTube, are now on my friend Brian Camenker’s “MassResistance.com” website. Please watch them while you still can by clicking HERE. The URL is http://www.massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html.

“It’s Elementary” is a wickedly manipulative pro-homosexual propaganda documentary used to promote pro-“gay” teachings for schoolchildren — even young kids who don’t even know what sex is yet. The film shows actual lessons directed at elementary schools kids — in the classroom — of the sort that only a hardened liberal or homosexual activist would find unobjectionable.

The video is horrifying proof of how liberal educationists are turning the nation’s public (and some private) schools into pro-homosexual advocacy zones — beginning with innocent, young, malleable minds — to create a generation of pro-“gay” Americans who will help usher in the full “gay” political/cultural agenda, including “same-sex marriage.” Changing young minds through one-sided propaganda is GLSEN’s (the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) raison d’etre. (To read a paper I wrote for CWA in 2002 highlighting GLSEN’s radical agenda, click HERE.)

Background: ‘Gay’ Smear Campaign Begins 

Dr. Warren Throckmorton, a good man who promotes ex-“gay” therapy but who we fear is overly solicitous of homosexual activists’ hyper-sensitive complaints, pointed out on his blog (headline: “Racism on YouTube”…) that the man who posted the “It’s Elementary” videos on YouTube is a confirmed racist. This is terrible but only a secondary story line here.

Curiously, Warren offered no timely insights on the pro-homosexuality youth video itself, even as thousands of people across the country were circulating emails about the “brainwashing” videos; more on that later.

Camenker, who is an orthodox Jew, and I (a Christian) share a contempt for white supremacy; to us any kind of racism is a sin, just as all homosexual behavior is sinful. But the real story here is not who originally posted the videos. In fact, I can’t tell you the exact rules, but my hunch is anyone could have posted “fair use” excerpts of “It’s Elementary,” along with commentary, since the pro-homosexual film was in large circulation and has caused great controversy since its creation.

No, the real story is the shocking content of the videos, and that so many Americans apparently were, and are, unaware that such blatant indoctrination techniques already have been used on young children (in more liberal school districts) for so long. In the first video, you can watch as one young girl in a grade school in the People’s Republic of Madison, Wisconsin, expresses visible shock and angst as her (male) teacher informs her in the classroom that popular rock star Melissa Etheridge is a lesbian.

There is simply no excuse for forcing adult sexual ideologies on helpless kids in the classroom

Bennett Exposes True Agenda, Gets Smeared 

My friend Steve Bennett, a former homosexual and founder of Stephen Bennett Ministries, received the “It’s Elementary” clips from another group and then passed them on to his ministry members as an e-mail alert when they were still on YouTube (the original poster gave them makeshift titles: “Homosexuals Brainwash Children,” Parts I and II). Steve then sent out a second e-mail disavowing the YouTube poster’s use of the  tag “Faggot” to mark the video. 

Steve tells Americans For Truth that when saw the “faggot” tag and the fact that the same poster had put up white supremacy videos, he immediately reported the guy to YouTube; presumably, after others did the same, the shocking “gay”-indoctrination video clips were taken down and the racist was banned from posting again on YouTube.

“The video stands on its own merits,” Bennett told me.

Predictably, homosexual activists like blogger John Aravosis used the fact that the video was posted on YouTube by a racist to link the pro-family movement and groups like Concerned Women for America to racist hatemongers. Aravosis wrongly asserts that Bennett is a spokesman for CWA when in reality the ex-“gay” leader hasn’t acted as such for several years (and he was never a paid spokesman).

Truth is, Aravosis — who led the homosexual web assault on Dr. Laura Schlessinger a few years back — could write a book on hate, so bitter is he at pro-family groups for opposing homosexual behavior (which he has chosen to embrace), but that’s a story for another day.

Jeremy Hooper, a young homosexual blogger, echoed Aravosis, writing (emphasis his; the original links to racist videos are removed):

Our outrage is not because we have anything to hide with the “It’s Elementary” video and because our hidden “agenda” has been exposed. Our outrage is over the fact that Mr. Bennett linked to a clip of someone who also uploaded clips with titles like “Keep America White,” as well as one with the description: “A video celebrating Hitler and the National Socialist Movement.” What, do they think his antipathy for gay people is his one redeeming standpoint?!
 

…The point is that the YouTube user who violated copyright and misrepresented this “must see video” (as [[the pro-family website Lifesite.com] calls it) is also responsible for tarnishing YouTube with some of the ugliest, angriest, most biased rhetoric that one could possibly disseminate. And Stephen Bennett, someone who is given respect by the organized “pro-family” movement, recommended that all of his good Christian followers support the work of this user.

Two observations:

1) Jeremy may think that the “gay” movement has nothing to hide with “It’s Elementary,” but the truth is that a vast majority of Americans and people worldwide would be shocked by these video excerpts. Saturation exposure of this video could cripple the “gay” movement, but if Jeremy thinks differently, we’d welcome his help in getting this video exposed widely to educate Americans on the “gay” agenda for young people in our schools;

  

2) How silly to think that Bennett or anybody who used YouTube’s efficient site to expose the evil of It’s Elementary’s homosexual propaganda “support[s] the work of this [racist] user.” What “work”? He posted a radical “gay” video, of which most people are unaware. Nobody in the Christian (religious) pro-family movement has anything positive to say about racism. Hooper keeps talking about “the man responsible for this video,” … Hello. The San Francisco group Women’s Educational Media is responsible for this video; they produced it! The sad fellow with racism issues merely posted excerpts from it online.

Bennett wrote me: “I clarified with my e-mail list in a follow up e-mail roughly a half an hour or so later to pay attention ONLY to the two videos I sent links to. I reported the nutty racist (who really needs prayer) before sending out my second e-mail. So, I have NO reason whatsoever to ‘defend’ myself against anyone. We aren’t ‘racists’ — everyone knows that — and the homosexual activists know that, too. They’re simply troublemakers and ‘bullies’ who need serious help.”

To that I add: how sad, or should I say how “queer,” that the main response of “gay” activists like Aravosis and Hooper to a video that shows young kids getting brainwashed — in the classroom — to accept homosexuality as normal is to smear pro-family leaders like Steve Bennett who are trying to bring this terrible injustice against children to the world’s attention.

More on “It’s Elementary” — there are worse excerpts than the YouTube segments — and how homosexual activists target VERY young children in future postings.

 


Support Americans for Truth about Homosexuality

Center For Morality
2783 Martin Rd.
#327
Dublin, OH 43017

Peter's Lifesite News Articles'

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Peter's Lifesite News Articles'


Americans for Truth Radio Hour

Americans for Truth Academy

Peter's Lifesite News Articles'