Defend the “Natural Family” in Oakland? You Might Be Guilty of “Hate Speech”

UPDATED Mar 6, 2007 — According to Appeals Court Sides With Oakland on Removal of “Natural Family” Sign, by Bob Elgecko, published Mar 5, 2007, by San Francisco Chronicle:

…The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a federal judge’s decision two years ago dismissing a lawsuit by the two employees, founders of a religious club called the Good News Employee Association.

In his February 2005 ruling, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker said the two had other means of communicating their views, such as talking to co-workers during lunch breaks. He also said the city was entitled to enforce its ban on harassing gay and lesbian employees.

Continue reading at San Francisco Chronicle…

——————————

Excerpted from ‘Natural Family’ Called Derogatory to ‘Gays’, published Feb 15, 2007, by WorldNet Daily:

A special session of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is being held today at the Stanford University Law School where lawyers are arguing whether the words “natural family, marriage and family values” constitute “hate speech” that could intimidate city of Oakland workers.

The words were used by two city employees who wanted to launch a group of people who shared their interests and posted a notice on a city bulletin board after a series of notices from homosexual activists were delivered to them via the city’s e-mail system, bulletin boards and memo distribution system.

But Robert Bobb, then city manager, and Joyce Hicks, then deputy director of the Community and Economic Development Agency, ordered their notice removed, because it contained “statements of a homophobic nature” and promoted “sexual-orientation-based harassment.”

The women, Regina Rederford and Robin Christy, also were threatened with firing from their city jobs because of their posting, according to their lawsuit against the city, which alleges Oakland’s anti-discrimination policy “promotes homosexuality” and “openly denounces Christian values.”

Posted in Christian Persecution, Court Decisions & Judges, GLBTQ Lawsuits & Retribution, News, Not with MY Tax money!

Eglin Air Force Base Captain Accused of Raping Six Men in Military

Excerpted from EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE: Gay Officer Denies Rape Claims of Six Men, by Melissa Nelson, published Feb 22, 2007, by Associated Press:

SIX SEX ATTACKS
…(Captain Devery L.) Taylor, 38, is accused of raping four men and attempting to rape two other men. He faces a maximum sentence of life in prison without parole if convicted of all the charges against him. The charges are two counts of attempted sodomy, four counts of forcible sodomy, three counts of kidnapping and one count of unlawful entry.

”This case is about homosexual activity that is not approved of by the military services in our country at this time…” Regan said…

SERIAL GAY RAPIST?
Capt. Eveylon Westbrook, the military prosecutor, described Taylor as a serial rapist who met his victims in bars, spiked their drinks with date-rape drug gamma-hydroxybutyrate, or GHB and kidnapped them.

”Each victim will tell you they felt like they were drugged before he either assaulted or attempted to assault them,” she said.

Continue reading in Miami Herald…

Posted in Homosexual Rape, Military, News

Illinois Homosexual Legislator Introduces “Gay Marriage” Bill Today

TAKE ACTION — First, contact IL State Rep Greg Harris
and express your opposition to this legislation.

Then contact your own representative and ask them to OPPOSE this bill.
You can find your legislator’s contact information HERE.

——————————–

Excerpted from Lawmaker: Legalize Gay Marriages, by Doug Finke, published Feb 22, 2007, by PJ Star:

State Rep. plans to introduce bill aiming to equalize rights

A Chicago Democrat wants Illinois to be the second state to legalize gay marriages.

State Rep. Greg Harris (pictured left) plans to introduce legislation today to permit same-sex couples to get married. Although four states recognize civil unions among gays, only Massachusetts provides for gay marriages.

“It would extend the same rights and obligations of marriage to same-sex couples in Illinois as are previously enjoyed, or not enjoyed, by heterosexual couples,” Harris said. “If you look at recent polls … people of Illinois very thoroughly understand that same-sex couples deserve the same rights and benefits” as heterosexual couples.

David Smith, executive director of the Illinois Family Institute, disagreed…

Harris, who is gay and represents a district with a large homosexual population, acknowledged that pushing for legalized gay marriages rather than civil unions will be controversial.

“It is undoubtedly true that the word marriage is a very emotionally charged term, so there may have to be some negotiations on that,” he said. “From my community, we believe we should have the full, equal rights as our heterosexual siblings to marry who we choose, and we should call it marriage. We should not call it civil union.”

Continue reading at PJ Star…

Posted in "Civil Unions" & "Gay Marriage", Candidates & Elected Officials, Equality Illinois, News, Pending Legislation

It’s OK to Be “Anti-Gay,” as Long as You Don’t Hate People

By Peter LaBarbera

Born “gay”? Oscar host and very “out” lesbian Ellen DeGeneres
revealed that she was molested by her stepdad as a teenager.

It’s OK to be “anti-gay,” as long as you don’t hate people. That is, as long as you understand that “gay” is not an innocuous, inborn trait but an adjective describing wrong and destructive behavior.

Sexual revolutionaries stole the real meaning of “gay” (merry, exuberant, according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary) decades ago, and it’s long gone now. So let’s try to redeem it by making some sense of what “gay” is and what it is not:

“Gay” is not an unchangeable trait like skin color and it has a moral component – unlike being left-handed or having blue eyes (to name two spurious analogies used by homosexual activists).

Nor is “being gay” “who you are,” as homosexual activists claim, but rather “what you do.” Even the word homosexual –– a Greek-Latin hybrid that dates back only to 1869 –– should be used only as an adjective, not a noun, as my friend and AFA-Michigan leader Gary Glenn reminds us (this is very hard to do, by the way).

The great news is that nobody has to be “gay.” Homosexuality need not be permanent in a person’s life, as proved by the thousands of former homosexuals living contented lives today. There are no ex-Blacks or ex-Latinos, while there are lots of ex-“gays” –– a fact that by itself should negate “gayness” as a civil rights category. (Strangely, many of the same liberals who lecture us about respecting “gays” either ignore or ridicule ex-“gays.”)

Nobody “happens to be gay,” either (another “gay” shibboleth). Environment plays a big role. Many “gay” men and lesbian women testify to dysfunctional or abusive childhoods and broken relationships with one or both parents. Ellen DeGeneres, a very public lesbian and host of the upcoming Academy Awards, has revealed that her stepfather molested her as a teenager. She is just one of countless homosexuals who testify to abuse in their past. Yet the media robotically parrot the “born gay” line as if it were just days away from becoming a scientific fact.

The semantic struggle that conservatives and Christians face is that there is no neat, positive equivalent to “pro-life” in the debate over homosexuality. Pro-normal? Pro-hetero? Nothing seems to work, hence we are left with the rather vague pro-family to avoid the negative-sounding, condemnatory anti-gay.

The evil genius of ‘gay’
Words have tremendous power. The evil genius of America’s homosexual activist movement is that it took a taboo behavior that was universally regarded as an unspeakable sin until a few short decades ago –– and redefined it as “gay.” In doing so, it created America’s “queerest” minority, at least until the homosexuals’ cross-dressing, “transgendered” allies came onto the scene using copycat tactics.

“Gay” activists succeeded in personalizing a destructive impulse to make it sound like a harmless identity, or trait.

Posted in Bathhouses, Born that Way?, Diversity & Tolerance Propaganda, Media Promotion, News, Youth and School Related Organizations

“Internalized Homophobia” — or God-Instilled Conscience?

Recently we came across the following question posed to “Ask the Therapist” at the pro-homosexuality “health and wellness” website, GayHealth.com (created by “gay” doctor Stephen Goldstone):

Q I’m attracted to other men and am always a top. I don’t ever bottom with anyone. The problem is that when I’m in a relationship I tend to feel awkward and after sex, even disgusted and I want to get up and leave. I’m not a one night stand kind of guy, however. I want to hold someone close and not distance myself and feel suffocated. Sometimes I wonder if I’m not supposed to even be with guys. What’s my problem?

Glen A. Heiss, PhD, gave the following advice:

A I don’t know whether you are “supposed” to be with guys or not, but to ask the question that way implies that there is a right answer to the question, “Who do you find attractive?”

The fact is, we are attracted to whomever we happen to be attracted to. When we’ve internalized messages that tell us those attractions are somehow wrong or bad, it is very difficult to get close to without becoming uncomfortable.

From what you write, you can enjoy sex with another man, but other kinds of closeness with a man are uncomfortable. The “awkward/suffocated/disgusted” feelings you experience most likely stem from your own mixed feelings about being in a relationship with another man. If those feelings are especially strong after you have sex, they are probably being caused by shame you feel about the sex you‘ve just had. And if you are invested in keeping this part of your life a secret, that’s going to make it more difficult to try to integrate your sexual feelings for someone into a more complete relationship with him.

If you want to do something about this, I would recommend that you try to talk with the guys you are dating BEFORE you have sex about the unpleasant feelings you tend to have afterwards. That may reduce some of the worry or dread that you may have about what will happen after you reach orgasm.

You are likely to find that the men you are dating have struggled with this same issue in their own ways. They may be able to offer help about how they have worked to resolve such difficulties, allowing you to develop some of the closeness you say you want even as you talk about how that closeness can be difficult at times.

We can agree with exactly two sentences of Heiss’ response: “The ‘awkward/suffocated/disgusted’ feelings you experience most likely stem from your own mixed feelings about being in a relationship with another man. If those feelings are especially strong after you have sex, they are probably being caused by shame you feel about the sex you‘ve just had.”

Shame is the correct response of a sinful man’s conscience toward God. Being “proud” about homosexual behavior offends the Creator while being contrite about any sin — sexual or otherwise — draws us closer to Him. (For more on the Bible and homosexuality, see Pittsburgh Theological Seminary professor Rob Gagnon’s website.) In that sense, this writer’s shame is a good thing and something that all (religious) homosexual advocates could use more of as they strive, with futility, to “please” God even as they rebel against His wonderful created order. — Peter LaBarbera

P.S. The Bible is an infinitely more reliable guide for this struggling soul than any pro-homosexuality website. But it must be read with the humble understanding that we are to conform to its truth, rather than pretend that its Author, a holy and all-powerful God, must conform to our thoughts and feelings.

Posted in A - What does the Bible say about homosexuality?, Mental Health, News, Physical Health

Media Condemn Hardaway but Ignore ‘Gay’ Activists’ Anti-Christian Hate

By Peter LaBarbera

Update on the “sniper” story: an investigator with the Rapid City, S.D., police department has contacted Americans For Truth and told us that South Dakota “gay” activist Barry Wick will not be prosecuted for his “Snipers, take note” comment against this writer, posted on lesbian Pam Spaulding’s blog, because the threat was “too vague.” We have received and accepted a heartfelt apology from Mr. Wick.

Yesterday, I was asked by a suburban Chicago newspaper to comment on former NBA star Tim Hardaway’s comment, “I hate gay people.” I said that what Hardaway said was wrong (he has since apologized): we have always condemned hatred and un-Christian messages like “Rev.” Fred Phelps “God Hates Fags” signs — although of course it is perfectly acceptable to oppose homosexuality.

And Hardaway does have a point about homosexuals in the locker room: we don’t let men shower and dress in women’s locker rooms, so shouldn’t men who define themselves as sexually attracted to other men be relegated to an alternative space? Ditto for lesbians: parents of athletic daughters should be concerned about the presence of lesbian coaches and girls open about their same-sex desires in female locker rooms.

I told the reporter that Hardaway’s comments will only play to the liberal caricature of Christians and religious people who oppose homosexuality on principle as “haters.”

Here’s the problem: the same media and liberals who rush to condemn Hardaway’s comments look the other way when homosexual activists like Pam Spaulding (who runs the “Pam’s House Blend” blog) spew abject hatred against Christians or anyone who speaks out against homosexual behavior. As my friend and former AFTAH Corporate Outreach Director Matt Barber describes in a column below, you don’t have to search very hard on Spaulding’s website to find evidence of her anti-Christian bigotry and hate-mongering.

And yet Duke University lauds Spaulding’s website as “fun” and “snappy.” Can you imagine Duke or any university promoting a “conservative” or religious website that engaged in regular, mean and ugly putdowns of homosexuals? Pam is the online “gay” equivalent of Phelps and his “God Hates Fags” campaign, so why is an institution of “higher learning” that ostensibly advocates “tolerance” promoting her brand of hatred?

Click HERE to write Duke University President Richard Brodhead (or call him at 919-684-2424) about Duke’s promotion of hateful lesbian and Duke employee Pam Spaulding’s anti-Christian website. Politely ask for an official apology for promoting anti-religious bigotry by touting her blog.

The NBA punished Hardaway for his remarks. Yet Duke U. rewards Spaulding with accolades despite her rank bigotry against Christians. (Memo to Pam: try making your points without mocking religion or resorting to sophomoric name-calling. Hate is a two-way street.)

Fact is, Spaulding is far from alone: there are countless examples of hateful homosexual attacks against Christians, like the wicked depiction of my friend and Maine Christian pro-family leader Mike Heath’s wife Paulie below. Yet the same media who fall over themselves in the sprint to condemn “anti-gay hate” show little interest in exposing acts of anti-Christian bigotry by homosexuals. Maybe that’s because most journalists fundamentally agree with the “gay” activist agenda and don’t want to do anything to harm its image–which reporting the truth certainly would.

Conversely, these days many in the media and Hollywood are applying the “hate” (or “homophobe”) label to almost anything that does not support the homosexual activist point of view.

The worst part about the liberals’ hypocritical double-standard on “hate” is that it actually contributes to escalating anti-Christian bigotry in our culture. Tim Hardaway will be blackballed for life unless he grovels in repentance — the press will make sure of that. Meanwhile, homosexual haters like Pam Spaulding are encouraged by the media’s agenda-driven silence.

A Maine homosexual activist posted the crude, digitally-altered graphic above,
of pro-family leader Mike Heath’s lovely wife, Christian songwriter Paulie Heath,
on the Amazon.com website.

P.S. Oh, I almost forgot: here’s a real photo of Paulie Heath, whom you can book for a concert at your church or women’s retreat by clicking HERE:

Matt Barber’s CWA column:

Hate Bloggers, Death Threats and Apologies Abound
By J. Matt Barber, published by Concerned Women for America Feb. 13

Media outlets have given the story fairly wide coverage. Presidential candidate and former Senator John Edwards (D- North Carolina) recently named two leftist, anti-Christian bloggers to high profile positions with his campaign. [They subsequently resigned.] …

But another story, with perhaps more serious implications, has gone largely unreported by the mainstream media.

Last week, Concerned Women for America (CWA) broke the news about an apparent threat to the life of pro-family advocate Peter LaBarbera made by a commenter on lesbian activist Pam Spaulding’s anti-Christian site Pam’s House Blend.

Spaulding is an information technology manager with Duke University Press, and her employer appears quite proud of its blustering left-wing blogger. Duke Press has even publicly praised and promoted her blog activities, calling them a “mixture of snappy prose, funny postings and serious commentary.”

So, just for fun, let’s see if we can’t yuck it up a bit with Duke University. Let’s take a look at some of Spaulding’s “snappy” and “funny” musings:

On her blog — among other things – Spaulding regularly mocks both Christ and Christians by sarcastically referring to Jesus as “jeebus.” She refers to Christians as both the “Am Taliban” (for American Taliban) and “bible beaters.” She’s doctored photos of the pope, dressing him in drag and women’s makeup, apparently implying that he’s a cross-dressing closet homosexual. Spaulding has likened a well-respected black New Jersey pastor to cult leader and mass murderer Jim Jones, and she has managed to ridicule both Christmas and pro-lifers in one fell swoop with a post titled, “Oh Fetus tree, Oh Fetus tree.”

Side splitting, isn’t it?

And if you think that’s funny, this’ll make you collapse in gales of laughter:

In what was, at the very least, an apparent attempt to intimidate and frighten Americans for Truth president Peter LaBarbera, who is married with children, someone on House Blend published his home address in a January 13, 2007, thread. Shortly thereafter, someone identified as “Barry G. Wick” suggested that “snipers take note” of LaBarbera’s address. Wick also suggested that shooting LaBarbera would amount to an act of self defense and stated that, “[LaBarbera] and others like him ought to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what future awaits them from a cadre of selected defenders willing to give up everything in order to protect the lives of gay and lesbian citizens.”

Spaulding and other members of her blog so frequently foment hatred toward Christians that it’s no real surprise that one of her posts culminated in this chilling and ostensibly illegal threat to LaBarbera’s life.

Soon after CWA broke the story, Spaulding issued a public apology to LaBarbera and removed the threatening language from her site. She has purportedly banned Wick from her blog. Spaulding indicated that she was unaware of the post, although the threat had been posted for nearly three weeks. LaBarbera was gracious enough to take her at her word and has accepted her apology.

But Spaulding should apologize further.

She should apologize to the millions of Christians around the world whom she mocks and bashes on a daily basis.

She should apologize to pro-family leaders like LaBarbera, Dr. James Dobson, Beverly LaHaye and others whom she unfairly belittles and needlessly berates.

But she probably won’t.

And since one can reasonably infer that Duke University Press has placed its stamp of approval on Spaulding’s anti-Christian tirades, perhaps it’s appropriate for them to apologize on her behalf – that is, if they don’t actually share her backward beliefs.

But don’t hold your breath.

We’ve all seen how collectively stingy Duke University staff can be with apologies. Remember the ad the lynch mob – er – faculty hastily took out condemning the Duke Lacrosse team members accused of rape? They rendered judgment before the ink was dry on the arrest warrant but arrogantly refused to apologize even after it became abundantly clear that the accused would likely be exonerated.

Still, if Duke’s stubborn liberal pride won’t allow them to apologize for enabling, if not endorsing, Spaulding’s hateful screeds, then at the very least Duke University President Richard H. Brodhead will surely denounce the threat made to LaBarbera’s life on the very blog of which Duke is so proud.

It’s a noxious paradox, really. The left loves to pay lip service to the rhetoric of tolerance and diversity, while their own bigotry is betrayed by hateful and intolerant blather such as that which pollutes the cyber-pages of Pam’s House Blend.

And they’re not saying “sorry” for it.

But someone is apologizing.

Last Wednesday, February 7, South Dakota homosexual activist Barry G. Wick faxed a letter to CWA’s Washington D.C. headquarters admitting that he was the author of the threatening House Blend comments. Wick issued what appeared to be a heartfelt apology to LaBarbera and requested that CWA pass along his sincere regrets to the Christian community. Again, LaBarbera has graciously accepted the apology and says that he has forgiven Wick.

We are all sinners – every one. Christians are commanded to forgive others as we pray the Father will forgive us. However, even in forgiveness actions have consequences. We are a nation of laws, and when those laws are violated, there is a legal process that should and must take place.

Objectively speaking, a threat to the life of another is a very serious offense, even if it’s subjectively made in jest. It must always be treated as a bona fide threat. LaBarbera has shared that when he learned of what appeared to be an imminent threat to his person; he contacted the FBI and other appropriate law enforcement agencies.

Federal law is clear. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 875 (c) states: “Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”

The legal process is in motion, and as with all serious matters of this type, our unique system of justice will determine the outcome.

In the meantime, the very Christians who are the subject of those insidious threats, hateful words, and intolerant acts of omission will – in LaBarbera’s own words – be praying for “Spaulding, Barry Wick, and all those whose embrace of homosexuality has led them to be consumed by hatred toward Christians and others who defend natural sexuality and marriage.”

Matt Barber is one of the “like-minded men” with Concerned Women for America. He is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law and serves as CWA’s policy director for cultural issues.

Posted in Christian Persecution, Current State Law, GLBTQ Lawsuits & Retribution, Homosexual Hate Speech, News, Pending Legislation

All Over but the Shouting: Homosexual “Marriage” Push Comes to Maine

Mike Heath, Executive Director of the Christian Civic League of Maine since 1994, is a bona fide hero in the fight against “gay” activism and the normalization of homosexuality in the United States. Working with pro-family leaders, Heath fought back not not but two statewide “gay rights” laws in Maine. (In 2005, “sexual orientation” became law in the state, and now, as the thinking goes, the granting of one counterfeit “right” — same-sex “marriage” — must follow another.) Heath is serving Americans For Truth as an advisor. — Peter LaBarbera.

I’ve been doing this job too long. I can remember when leftist activists were screaming about how there was no agenda, and there was especially no effort underway to persuade society to accept sodomy-based “marriage.” Those lies started to become muted when Vermont used their “sexual orientation” law to force a new concept on civilized society called “civil unions.” That is another euphemism for sodomy-based “marriage.” Massachusetts, of course, followed soon after by discovering that the puritan Christian John Adams actually wrote sodomy-based “marriage” into the Commonwealth’s constitution. Imagine that. No … don’t.

Nobody is surprised now when “gays” use euphemisms. I think people stopped being surprised by anything these folks say years ago. They are master manipulators, bobbing and weaving with their words and phrases. It’s amazing to most of us that the Harvards and Yales have fallen for this tripe hook, line and sinker ….

Posted in "Civil Unions" & "Gay Marriage", News

Scottish Nurses Directed Not to Use “Mum or “Dad” — Too “Homophobic”

A revolutionary assault on sex and gender norms requires a revolutionary new vocabulary. The homosexualist movement stole the word “gay,” and is busy redefining “marriage” and “spouse.” Next comes the basic descriptors of the family. Mom, dad, children? How utterly heterosexist of you! The following is excerpted from Good LGBT Practice in the NHS, a joint publication from the homosexual activist organization Stonewall Scotland and Scotland’s National Health Service:

Page 2 — Scots’ tax money at work…

Page 7 — “In order to avoid this confusion…”

Partners and “next of kin”
Using the terms “husband”, “wife” and “marriage” assumes opposite sex relationships only and will automatically exclude all LGB people. Using the term “partner” and “they/them” to refer to the partner will avoid this problem. This is also inclusive of all heterosexual couples, regardless of their marital status. Many people hold a mistaken belief that “next of kin” must be a married partner or blood relation. In order to avoid this confusion it may be advisable to use “partner, close friend or close relative”. This allows the patient to identify and choose who is important to them. For example, the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 200310 defines the most important nearest relative (after spouse or civil partner) as a
cohabiting same-sex or opposite-sex partner.

Page 7 — Anthing but mom and dad…

Parenting
LGBT people can and do have children, sexual orientation or gender identity has nothing to do with good parenting or good child care. According to a Scottish wide survey (11), one fifth of LGBT people have children. Some children will have been born or adopted into heterosexual relationships before a parent had ‘come out’ and some are born into same-sex relationships or adopted by an LGB individual. Individual circumstances lead to varied family structures and parenting arrangements. It is important to be aware of this. When talking to children, consider using “parents”, “carers” or “guardians” rather than “mother” or “father”.

The booklet advocates “a zero-tolerance policy to discriminatory language” for health care workers in Scotland.

Posted in Adoption & Foster Parenting, Mental Health, News, Physical Health, Stonewall Scotland, UK